Manually sync the knowledge base from GitHub to get current content before the next scheduled update. Forces an immediate refresh when needed.
Manually trigger a knowledge base update from GitHub. Normally happens automatically every 30 minutes.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| force | No | Force update even if recently synced |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It does reveal that the tool is a manual trigger and that automation runs every 30 minutes, but it does not discuss side effects, async behavior, required permissions, or what happens after the update is triggered.
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 core action and the relevant automation context without waste. The description is front-loaded with the imperative action and the automatic cadence immediately follows.
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 simple one-parameter trigger with no output schema, the description covers the essential what and when. It could be more complete by noting whether the update is synchronous or asynchronous, but it is adequate for tool selection and 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?
The schema fully documents the single 'force' parameter with a clear description, so the description does not need to repeat it. Baseline 3 applies because schema coverage is high and the tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning.
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 clearly states the specific action: manually triggering a knowledge base update from GitHub. It uses an unambiguous verb and resource, and it is easily distinguished from the sibling tools like search_knowledge_base or list_repositories.
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 mention that updates normally happen automatically every 30 minutes gives clear context that this tool is for out-of-band manual refreshes. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the intended usage is reasonably inferable.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.