aiworkhub_source_graph_refresh_now

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does add real behavioral context — the build is bounded, incremental (or full only on first run), and serialized against the background refresh — which is useful. But it omits whether the call blocks until completion, expected duration, and any auth/cost implications.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. The action verb ('Force ... build now') leads and every clause adds scope information.

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 no-argument trigger with an output schema covering return values, the description supplies the essential context: what is built, what mode, and how it interacts with the background refresh. Only the synchronous/asynchronous behavior remains unstated.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to document; baseline 4 applies.

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 and resource: forcing a Source Graph build now, with the scope qualifier 'bounded incremental (or first-ever full)'. This distinguishes it from a routine periodic refresh, though it never names the sibling it competes with (e.g. aiworkhub_source_graph_ensure_started).

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 phrase 'now, non-overlapping with the periodic background refresh' implies the use case (immediate forced rebuild) but gives no explicit when-to-use vs ensure_started/stop guidance and no exclusions. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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