set_refresh_schedule

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses authentication needs and that the token is never echoed, which is valuable safety context. It does not detail overwrite behavior or side effects, but the verb 'set' implies replacement of the existing plan.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and includes essential auth caveat without extraneous text. Every word 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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity, the schema fully documents parameters, and the description covers the main action and auth requirement. It does not mention return values or error scenarios, but with no output schema, these are not essential for invocation.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, with each parameter described. The description groups the schedule components (enable/disable, days, times, timezone) but does not add syntactic details beyond what the schema already provides. This is adequate but not additive.

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 uses specific verb 'Set' plus the resource 'scheduled-refresh plan' and explicitly names the components (enable/disable, days, times, timezone). It also includes the HTTP PATCH endpoint, which unambiguously distinguishes this from refresh_dataset and get_refresh_status.

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 description provides clear context: it is for published datasets and requires an AAD token, which are important usage prerequisites. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, so it stops short of full exclusion guidance.

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