refresh_host

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It conveys that this is a maintenance/recovery side-effect operation, not a normal read, and implies it mutates session routing state. It does not state permissions, cost, or whether it can fail, but the situational framing is strong.

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?

Two tight sentences: the action first, the narrow triggering condition second. Every clause earns its place.

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-param, no-output-schema recovery tool, the description gives enough for an agent to know exactly when and why to call it. Only minor gap is what happens on success/failure, which is acceptable given the scope.

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?

Zero parameters, so baseline is 4. The description correctly signals the tool takes no input and acts on the ambient token context, which is the only semantic needed.

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 action (re-resolve host) tied to a specific resource (this API Token's database host). It is clearly distinguishable from generic_call or schema_lookup, though the term 'Accurate host' assumes product-specific context that isn't defined.

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 it is needed ('only if requests suddenly start failing in a way that suggests the database migrated') and implicitly when it is not (normally unnecessary), which is exactly the routing guidance an agent needs.

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