Refresh polling

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

The annotations signal that this is a non-read-only, non-idempotent, open-world operation, so the description should explain the side effects of a refresh, but it does not. It adds only the scope 'for the authenticated user' and the fact that host polling is the target; there is no mention of background work, cache invalidation, or external effects.

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?

The text is short and front-loaded, but it wastes its first sentence by repeating the title verbatim. The remaining sentence carries some scope information but still leaves the core behavior vague, so the brevity is not paired with useful density.

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?

For a no-parameter action, the description should clarify what condition warrants calling it and what observable effect the user should expect. With no output schema, the description also does not indicate whether the tool returns refreshed metrics, a status, or nothing, leaving a meaningful gap.

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 input schema has zero properties, so there are no parameter semantics to document. The baseline of 4 applies because an agent cannot misconfigure any arguments.

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 second sentence gives a recognizable action and target ('Refreshes host polling for the authenticated user'), so the tool is not a complete tautology. However, 'refresh polling' is underspecified and does not differentiate this from nearby metrics polling tools; the first sentence merely repeats the title.

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?

There is no explicit or implicit guidance about which situations call for this tool versus the many related metrics tools such as termix_metrics_start_polling_updated_host or termix_metrics_stop_polling_deleted_host. The only contextual clue is 'for the authenticated user,' which is not enough to route an agent correctly.

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