db_reef_refresh

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

Discloses that the tool replaces facts (mutation, consistent with readOnlyHint=false) and depends on existing schema snapshot/read-model indexes. Adds dependency context beyond annotations (idempotentHint=false, openWorldHint=true).

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose and list of ingested items, followed by a prerequisite. No fluff, but the list could be more structured (e.g., bullet points).

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?

Adequate for core purpose and dependency, but lacks parameter semantics and explanation of output (output schema exists, so return values not required). Missing details on how parameters like 'freshen' or 'includeAppUsage' affect behavior.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to explain any of the 6 parameters (projectId, projectRef, includeAppUsage, includeFacts, factsLimit, freshen). The description provides no parameter-specific guidance, leaving the agent to guess.

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 a specific verb ('replace indexed Reef facts') and lists the exact items ingested, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like project_index_refresh, which is mentioned as a prerequisite.

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?

Describes when to use (to refresh Reef facts for schema snapshot) and provides a clear precondition: run project_index_refresh first if snapshot is stale. No explicit alternatives or when-not, but the context is sufficient.

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