peaka_refresh_materialized_query

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

Annotations already mark the operation as not read-only and not destructive. The description adds that the operation is a refresh on a saved materialized query but does not disclose whether it is asynchronous, how completion is observed, or what it returns, leaving a gap beyond the annotations.

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?

Four short sentences, with the core purpose first and no filler. Each sentence carries operational value; the workflow for projectId is the only slight extension but is justified.

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 a two-parameter mutation tool, the description covers purpose, parameter provenance, and a project-selection workflow. However, with no output schema, it never states the return value or whether refresh is asynchronous and should be followed with peaka_get_materialized_query_statuses, leaving a real gap for an agent to know the expected response and follow-up.

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?

The input schema already fully documents both required parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds actionable parameter context beyond the schema: the queryId must come from peaka_list_queries with queryType 'MATERIALIZED', and projectId should be resolved via peaka_list_projects and then remembered for the session.

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 opens with a specific verb-resource pair ('Trigger a refresh on a materialized saved query'), and further disambiguates by requiring queryType 'MATERIALIZED' from peaka_list_queries, distinguishing it from execute/status/cache siblings.

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?

It explicitly directs the agent to obtain queryId from peaka_list_queries filtered to MATERIALIZED queries, and instructs to call peaka_list_projects first if projectId is unknown and to remember the chosen projectId. This gives clear when-to-use and precondition guidance.

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