da_media_refresh_cache

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavior. It explains the mechanism ('fetching the latest media.json') and implies a mutation (cache refresh), but does not disclose potential side effects, permissions required, or impact on other operations. The transparency is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, no wasted words, and front-loads the key action and usage context. Every part earns its place.

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?

Given the tool has no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the primary purpose and usage but does not explain return values or post-condition behavior. It is complete enough for a simple cache refresh, but could be more thorough.

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%, so the schema already documents all three parameters (org, path, repo). The description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning beyond what is in the schema, which meets the baseline for this dimension.

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 action ('Refresh the media data cache') and specifies the method ('by fetching the latest media.json'). It also provides usage context ('Use when media has been updated'), effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like da_media_check_status or da_media_get_index.

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 description gives clear usage guidance ('Use when media has been updated'), but does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or mention alternatives. The guidance is sufficient for typical use cases, but lacks exclusions.

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