Synchronize DaVinci Resolve's internal objects with the current project state to fix stale data.
Refresh all internal Resolve objects to reflect the current state.
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "refresh"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains the action but does not disclose any side effects, whether unsaved changes are affected, permissions required, or if it is a safe read-only operation. The term 'refresh' implies a non-destructive update but lacks explicit detail.
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 description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It clearly conveys the tool's core purpose.
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 simple zero-parameter tool, the description is minimally sufficient. It tells what it does, but lacks contextual details like when to use, side effects, and alternatives. Given no annotations or output schema, more behavioral context would improve completeness.
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?
There are zero parameters (schema coverage 100%), so the description does not need to explain parameters. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4.
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 clearly states the action (refresh), the resource (all internal Resolve objects), and the purpose (to reflect the current state). It is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like create_project or load_project.
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?
The phrase 'to reflect the current state' implies it should be used after state changes or external modifications, but it does not explicitly say when to use it vs alternatives or exclude scenarios. No explicit alternatives are mentioned.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.