refresh_scores

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully covers behavior: requires valid Medify auth, overwrites cache only, does not change Medify account data, and returns fetch metadata. No contradictions.

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?

Four sentences concisely convey purpose, usage, limitations, and return value. No wasted words; essential information is front-loaded.

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 refresh/cache tool with no input or output schema, the description is fully complete. It covers triggers, effects, requirements, and limitations.

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?

Tool has zero parameters, so parameter semantics are not applicable. The description effectively explains the tool's behavior without needing parameter details.

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 tool's specific action: force re-fetch completed mock scores from Medify and update local cache. It distinguishes from sibling tools like analyze_score_trends by noting it does not analyze scores.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (after finishing a mock with stale data or cache TTL not expired) and what not to use it for (does not analyze scores). Recommends pairing with analyze_score_trends or list_completed_mocks for further analysis.

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