xcode_refresh_project

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states the tool closes and reopens the project, which is a behavioral trait. It does not mention potential side effects, but for a refresh operation, this is adequate. It discloses the main mechanism.

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, well-structured sentence. It is front-loaded with the action and purpose, and every word contributes to understanding. No redundancy or fluff.

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's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is complete. It explains what it does, why (external changes), and how (close and reopen). The sibling tools list does not include a similar refresh tool, so context is sufficient.

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 the 'xcodeproj' parameter well. The description does not add meaning beyond what the schema provides (e.g., no extra details on path format or fallback behavior). Baseline score of 3 is 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?

The description clearly states the action 'Refresh/reload' and the resource 'Xcode project', with the specific purpose of picking up external changes like modified .xctestplan files. It distinguishes itself from siblings like xcode_open_project and xcode_close_project by combining close and reopen into a single operation.

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 implies use when external changes have been made (e.g., modified .xctestplan files). While it does not explicitly list when not to use or name alternatives, the context is clear enough for an agent to decide. A more explicit exclusion would raise the score.

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