refresh_channel_cache

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

Annotations already convey mutation and non-destructiveness, and the description adds context about stale-channel-cache scenarios. However, it does not explain what the refresh actually does internally, such as invalidation, refetching, or potential side effects beyond the cache.

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 two short sentences with no filler. The primary action is front-loaded and the usage guidance is immediate.

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 zero-parameter cache refresh tool, the description and existing annotations fully enable an agent to decide when to invoke it. The presence of an output schema covers return-value expectations.

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 is empty and there are zero parameters, so the description has no parameter semantics to add; the baseline of 4 applies because nothing needs documenting.

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 identifies the action ('Refresh the channel cache') and the resource affected, so an agent knows what the tool does. It is distinct from sibling refresh_user_cache because it targets the channel cache rather than the user cache.

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 instructs when to use the tool: 'when new channels are created or if channel lookups are failing.' It does not name alternative tools or provide exclusion conditions, but the trigger context is clear and actionable.

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