POST /trips/:tripID/refresh — Trigger a trip refresh
Owner-only sync trigger. Enqueues a deduped background job that recomputes the trip's discovery (overlapping people, events, AI blurbs). Spammy reloads coalesce. Returns 202 Accepted immediately; the cached discovery block on the trip doc updates when the job completes.
⚠️ WRITE operation: this mutates your DC account data.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tripID | Yes | The trip ID to refresh |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description fully bears the burden. It discloses it's a WRITE operation, enqueues a background job, returns 202 Accepted immediately, and updates a cached block. Also mentions deduped and coalescing behavior.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Concise and well-structured: endpoint line, a paragraph explaining behavior, and a warning. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Fully covers purpose, usage, behavior, parameters, and side effects. Despite no output schema, the description explains what the caller can expect (202 response and eventual update).
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% with a clear description for the single parameter. The tool description adds minimal extra detail beyond the schema, meeting the baseline of 3.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool triggers a trip refresh, recomputing discovery data. It specifies the HTTP method and endpoint, and distinguishes from sibling tools like trip_discovery or trip_update by focusing on a unique refresh action.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly mentions 'Owner-only sync trigger', indicating who should use it. Notes that spammy reloads coalesce, providing useful usage context. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but this tool is distinct among siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Despite the large number of tools, each has a detailed description that clearly distinguishes its purpose. Minor potential overlaps (e.g., search vs. resource-specific search, own vs. other's agenda) are well documented, so an agent can differentiate them.
Tool names follow a consistent verb_noun or resource_subresource_action pattern in snake_case. A few tools are just nouns (e.g., 'alerts', 'announcements'), but these are top-level listing endpoints; overall the naming is predictable.
85 tools is very high for a single server, making it difficult for an agent to efficiently explore and select the right tool. While each tool seems justified for the broad domain, the count feels overwhelming and could be streamlined.
The tool surface covers most major areas (events, trips, chapters, rooms, search, profile, etc.) with CRUD or lifecycle operations. However, the lack of a 'send message' tool for rooms is a notable gap, and some resources (e.g., events) are read-only on creation/update, limiting agent workflows.
