Refrescar dataset

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'asincronico' (async), a useful trait, but says nothing about permissions, reversibility, failure modes, or what happens after the trigger. This is minimal for an action/mutation tool.

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 a single sentence with no filler. It states the action and the target concisely. While minimal, it earns its place without unnecessary words.

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 an action tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the asynchronous nature's implications (e.g., no immediate result, need to poll status), nor does it cover any side effects or prerequisites. An agent would lack critical context for correct 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with both parameters (datasetId and workspaceId) described in the input schema. The description adds no further parameter semantics, which meets the baseline expectation when schema coverage is high.

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 uses a specific verb ('Dispara' = triggers) and a clear resource ('refresh asincronico de un dataset' = async refresh of a dataset). It is distinguishable from sibling tools (list/execute operations), but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from them.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or conditions that would select this tool over siblings like execute_dax or list_datasets.

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