refresh_scrapers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description usefully adds the external timing model (a daily refresh cycle exists, this bypasses it). It does not say whether the call blocks until the refresh finishes, how long it takes, or whether it is rate-limited — for a trigger action those are the traits that matter most.

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?

A single sentence with no filler, and the action is front-loaded ahead of the justification. 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 low-complexity, zero-parameter trigger with no output schema, the description supplies enough to call it correctly and understand why. It could add whether it returns the refreshed list or merely kicks off the refresh, but that is a minor gap against this tool's simplicity.

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 and the schema has 100% coverage, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Baseline 4 applies for a no-argument tool.

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 ('Reload the scraper list') with the timing qualifier 'now instead of waiting for the daily refresh,' which makes the action unambiguous. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from nearby siblings such as search_scrapers or get_scraper_details, so it stops 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?

The phrase 'instead of waiting for the daily refresh' implies the use case (forcing freshness when the cached list is stale), which is more than nothing. However, it names no alternative tool and gives no when-not condition, so the guidance remains implied rather than explicit.

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