refresh_pairs_cache

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

No annotations are provided, so the description fully covers behavioral traits: it explains that it forces a cache refresh, mentions the default TTL (1h), and clarifies that all pairs are re-acquired even if a specific pair is given.

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 sentences, front-loaded with category and endpoint, and every sentence adds value. No waste.

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?

The tool is simple with one optional parameter and no output schema. The description fully explains the tool's purpose, usage, and parameter behavior, making it complete for an agent.

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 coverage is 100%, but the description adds critical clarity: it explains that the 'pair' parameter only highlights that pair's rate and does not limit re-acquisition to that pair. This goes beyond the schema description.

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 tool forces re-acquisition of TTL cache for fee rates, with specific context (maintenance/fees) and a concrete use case (campaign boundaries). It is distinct from sibling tools, which are all analysis-oriented.

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 explicitly mentions when to use (to refresh fee rate cache, e.g., at campaign boundaries). It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the context implies it is not for normal operations.

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