request_reload

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full burden. 'Request reload' implies a side-effectful operation, but the description does not disclose whether the reload is asynchronous, how long it takes, whether existing data is overwritten, or whether it requires particular authorization.

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?

One sentence plus an Args block; every element is useful and the key action is front-loaded. No redundant or filler content.

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?

With one required parameter, no annotations, and an output schema present, the description is minimally sufficient to construct a call: pass a YYYY-MM-DD date. However, it lacks any guidance about when to use the tool or what the user should expect after invoking it, so it is not fully complete.

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?

The description provides 'Date in YYYY-MM-DD format', which adds a precise format the schema does not specify. It does not explain what the date refers to or any constraints such as timezone or allowed historical range, so compensation is only partial.

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?

States a specific action ('request reload') on a specific data type ('epoch data'), and the required date parameter follows. There are no sibling tools with a reload function, so no differentiation ambiguity, but 'epoch data' remains jargon and the purpose of a reload is not elaborated.

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?

No guidance is given on when this tool should be invoked, what problem it solves, or whether it should be used as a fallback when epoch data appears stale or missing. The text simply asserts the action and lists the argument.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.