refresh_now

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose two important traits: the call is rate limited and refreshes otherwise occur automatically every few hours. It does not say whether the call blocks until the refresh finishes, how long it takes, or what happens when the rate limit is hit. Since an output schema exists, the return shape need not be explained.

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 with the action front-loaded and the caveats parenthesized. Every clause earns its place, and there is no redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 zero-parameter, side-effecting utility with an output schema, the description covers purpose, cost (rate limit), and the normal-behavior alternative (automatic refresh). Only timing or blocking behavior is missing, which is a minor gap for this complexity level.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to convey. The baseline of 4 applies; nothing in the description misleads about inputs.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Force a refresh from the website.' That is clearly distinguishable from the read-only siblings (get_events, get_week, get_status), which fetch data rather than trigger a refresh. It does not name a sibling explicitly, keeping it just short of a 5.

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?

Usage context is clear: use this only when you need an immediate refresh, because data 'normally refreshes automatically every few hours.' The rate-limit warning also implies this should not be called routinely. No alternative tool is named, but none in the sibling list performs the same function.

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