refresh_repos

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It states the action ('refresh') but does not disclose side effects, permissions, rate limits, or whether it fetches from remote. Minimal behavioral context.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with verb and resource. Concisely states the core function and optional behavior. Slightly informal but efficient.

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 a single parameter and an output schema (exists), the description is minimally adequate. It lacks details on what 'refresh' entails (e.g., local vs remote), but covers the optional parameter.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description adds value by explaining the optional parameter include_status ('optionally include codegraph status output'). However, it does not elaborate beyond the parameter's basic effect.

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 uses the specific verb 'Refresh' and resource 'repository metadata', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_repos or explore_repo. However, it could be more explicit about what 'metadata' includes.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., list_repos for current state, explore_repo for details). The tool's purpose is implied but not contextualized.

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