refresh_synced_crypto

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

The openWorldHint annotation already signals external-world interaction, and the description makes this concrete by stating 'Reaches out to the external crypto provider.' It does not go further to explain failure modes, latency, or whether existing balance history is affected, but it does disclose the core external side effect.

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 short sentences deliver the action, resource, return value, and external behavior with no filler. The most important 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?

This is a single-parameter tool with a fully described schema. The description adds the return value and external-provider behavior, which is useful since there is no output schema. It lacks deeper guidance about error handling or alternatives, but is adequate for a simple trigger operation.

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 input schema has 100% coverage and describes crypto_id as 'Id of the synced crypto account to refresh.' The tool description repeats essentially the same information without adding new parameter-level meaning, so it stays at the schema-mediated baseline.

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 states a specific action ('Trigger a balance refresh'), a specific resource ('synced crypto account'), and the expected return value ('return the refreshed account'). It clearly distinguishes this from sibling read-only tools like get_synced_crypto_balance or get_single_synced_crypto.

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 gives clear context: it is for synced crypto accounts and involves reaching out to the external crypto provider. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the 'synced' qualifier and refresh action make the intended use reasonably clear.

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