Fetch one remote Swagger/OpenAPI JSON document and overwrite only its local cache. Refresh a single service's API spec for a workspace without affecting other cached services.
Explicitly fetch one remote Swagger/OpenAPI JSON document and overwrite only its local cache.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| service | Yes | ||
| workspace | Yes | Absolute path to the business project that owns .swagger-mcp. |
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 burden. It usefully discloses that only the single service's local cache is overwritten (blast radius) and that a remote fetch occurs (network dependency). It omits failure behavior if the fetch fails, whether the old cache is preserved, and any auth requirements.
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 tight sentence with the resource and scoping constraint front-loaded and no filler. Appropriately sized for a simple refresh action.
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 two-parameter mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the description conveys core behavior and cache scoping. It stops short of covering failure semantics, cache invalidation details, or the form of the 'service' argument, leaving some gaps for an agent.
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 only 50%: 'workspace' is described in the schema, but 'service' is undocumented in both the schema and the description. The phrase 'one remote Swagger/OpenAPI JSON document' loosely implies service selection but gives no identifier format, so the description does not compensate for the coverage gap.
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: fetch one remote Swagger/OpenAPI JSON document and overwrite its local cache. The word 'one' implicitly separates it from the refresh_all_services sibling, though that sibling is never named. Clear without opening the schema, but the differentiation is only implied.
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?
'Explicitly fetch' hints this is a manual/on-demand refresh rather than an automatic one, implying usage when the cached spec is stale. However, no when-to-use condition, prerequisites, or named alternative (e.g., refresh_all_services) is given, so the routing to siblings is left to inference.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.