tokportal_can_refresh_account_analytics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, which cover the safety profile. The description adds no new behavioral context beyond what annotations provide (e.g., it doesn't mention that this is a lightweight check, or what happens if the account ID is invalid). It does not contradict 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?

The description is a single concise sentence that communicates the core purpose without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the verb. However, it could be slightly more specific about the resource being checked (e.g., 'for a given account').

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 has one required parameter, good annotations, and no output schema. The description is minimal but sufficient for a simple check operation. However, it doesn't explain what the return value indicates (e.g., boolean) or any edge cases (e.g., if the account is not found). Given the simplicity and annotation coverage, a 3 is reasonable.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the single 'id' parameter is explained as 'Saved account ID.' The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 title and description 'Check analytics refresh availability' clearly indicate a read-only check operation on analytics refresh status for an account. The verb 'check' combined with 'refresh availability' specifies the resource and action. However, it doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like 'tokportal_refresh_analytics_account' or 'tokportal_get_account_analytics', so a slight deduction applies.

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 implies using this tool to verify if analytics refresh is possible before performing a refresh, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like 'tokportal_refresh_analytics_account' or 'tokportal_get_account_analytics'. There is no guidance on prerequisites (e.g., account must exist) or when not to use it.

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