refresh_dataset

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the operation is a trigger and that it is a no-op on DIRECT_QUERY datasets, but omits whether the refresh is asynchronous, what happens on failure, permission requirements, or rate limits. For an action-triggering tool with zero annotation coverage this is adequate but leaves meaningful gaps.

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?

Three short sentences, all load-bearing: what it does, when to use it, and its exclusion case. The key action is front-loaded with no filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is unnecessary, and the description covers the core action and its main caveat. It could still note that refreshes are typically asynchronous and pair with get_refresh_status/cancel_refresh, which keeps it just short of fully complete for a state-changing tool.

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?

There is a single parameter (dataset_id) with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already documents it fully. The description adds no format, ID-source, or constraint detail beyond the schema, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 (trigger) and resource (SPICE refresh / data reload) scoped to a dataset, and adds a clear boundary ('no effect on DIRECT_QUERY datasets') that separates it from read-only dataset tools. An agent can distinguish it from get_refresh_status, list_recent_refreshes, and update_dataset_sql without opening schemas.

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?

Gives a clear when-to-use condition ('after updating dataset SQL to reload data into SPICE cache') and an implicit when-not ('no effect on DIRECT_QUERY datasets'). It never names explicit alternatives such as cancel_refresh or get_refresh_status, so it stops short of full alternative routing.

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