yn_refresh_tools

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

没有提供 annotations，描述承担行为披露任务。“强制刷新缓存”说明了操作对象和强制属性，但没有披露潜在副作用（例如刷新期间列表工具是否不可用、是否会触发上游网络调用或限流）。虽然比泛化的“更新”更具体，但对无 annotation 的工具仍有缺口。

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?

单句描述，信息密度高；“强制刷新”和具体使用场景都放在前面，没有冗余或重复 schema 的内容。

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?

该工具零参数、无输出 schema，复杂度极低。描述已经覆盖调用所需的核心信息：动作、目标、何时使用，足以让代理正确决定并调用。

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?

输入 schema 为空、参数为 0，因此按规则以 4 为基线。描述无需补充参数说明，也没有因 schema 覆盖不足而需要补偿的问题。

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?

描述明确列出动词“刷新”和宾语“上游工具列表缓存”，准确说明该工具做什么。与兄弟工具 yn_list_tools（列表）和 yn_status（状态）在名称和语义上有明显区分，不需要打开 schema 就能判断用途。

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?

描述给出明确使用时机：“上游改版或工具数量不对时使用”，这为 AI 提供了调用该工具的清晰触发条件。但它没有显式说明与 yn_list_tools/yn_status 的选用边界，例如“仅查看时用列表工具”，因此未达到满分。

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