refresh_market_intel

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

The description goes well beyond the annotations: it discloses latency ("takes several seconds"), the per-account call pattern, the write side effect on snapshots, and the exact 429 too_soon error with retry_after_seconds. The only thing not covered is what the response body contains, though the error contract covers the main failure mode.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and the when-to-use condition, and the 429 contract is stated compactly. It loses a point for redundancy: "One Meta call per account, so it takes several seconds" and "Slow: one Meta call per tracked account" say the same thing twice.

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?

No output schema is needed here because the description already establishes what the call produces (today's snapshot) and how other tools consume it. Combined with annotations and rate-limit details, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly and handle the common failure.

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?

This tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; the description correctly notes "Send {} as the body," which prevents an agent from inventing fields. There is no further parameter meaning to convey.

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 verb and resource ("Refresh from Meta ... writes today's snapshot") and explicitly scopes the write to the account plus every tracked competitor. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling read tools by noting "every other Market Intel read serves the snapshots this writes."

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?

Gives an explicit when-to-use condition ("Only call it when the stored snapshot is stale") and implicitly routes the agent to the read siblings otherwise. It also surfaces the operational constraint (five minutes enforced between refreshes) that governs repeated invocation.

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