refresh_symbols

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds contextual detail that the action is an immediate cache refresh and that it usually happens automatically, without contradicting the annotations. No side effects or error conditions are mentioned, but the simple nature of the tool makes this acceptable.

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 short sentences. The first sentence states the primary action, and the second gives usage context. Every word earns its place, and key information appears immediately.

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?

As a zero-argument utility with an output schema, the description fully explains its purpose and when to invoke it. There is no missing information that the agent would need to select or call the tool correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly avoids adding parameter details since none exist. It adds no parameter-related information, but none is needed.

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 tool '주식 목록 캐시를 즉시 갱신한다' (immediately refreshes the stock list cache), using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling retrieval tools like get_price and search_symbol, which are data readers.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided: '신규 상장 종목이 검색되지 않을 때 사용한다' (use when newly listed stocks are not found) and '평소에는 자동으로 갱신되므로 부를 필요가 없다' (normally auto-refreshes, so no need to call). This covers both when to use and when not to use.

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