pbs_datastore_s3_refresh

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: it's a mutation that overwrites local cache, passes through maintenance mode, dry-run vs execution, async response (UPID), null return for success, no undo, and config requirements. This is comprehensive.

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 concise and well-structured, using labels (MUTATION, RISK_MEDIUM) and bullet-like sentences. Every sentence adds essential information without redundancy.

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?

The description covers operation, risk, mode, side effects, async behavior, and config requirement. It assumes the datastore exists and is S3-backed (implied). With an output schema present, return values are not needed. Minor missing: explicit prerequisite that datastore must exist.

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 covers 100% of parameters, but description adds value by linking confirm to dry-run vs execution behavior. This extra context improves parameter understanding beyond schema alone.

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 verb ('refresh') and resource ('datastore's contents from S3 into local cache'). It distinguishes from sibling datastore tools (create, delete, update) and S3 check tools by specifying the exact operation and scope.

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?

Provides clear context: it's a mutation, dry-run by default, requires PROXIMO_PBS_* config. However, it does not explicitly state when to avoid using it (e.g., for non-S3 datastores) or compare to alternatives like pbs_datastore_create.

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