refresh_metadata

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

No annotations were provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It discloses the operation is expensive (minutes per source), throttled to once per 24 hours, and that force=True bypasses the throttle. This is comprehensive behavioral disclosure.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and cost warning. Each sentence serves a distinct purpose: purpose, cost, usage rules, throttle policy, force guidance. No redundancy or filler.

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 the tool's complexity (expensive, throttled, force), the description covers all critical aspects. An output schema exists, so return value explanation is unnecessary. The description is fully complete for an agent to use correctly.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that omitting source refreshes all enabled sources and that force bypasses the throttle. It also provides context for when force should be used, exceeding the schema's static descriptions.

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 refreshes the local schema metadata cache by querying live databases. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that list or search existing metadata without refreshing. The verb 'refresh' plus resource 'schema metadata cache' is specific and unambiguous.

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 states when to call (first-time setup, user-specified schema change) and when NOT to call (not automatically before reads). It also provides guidance on the force parameter and notes the 24-hour throttle, giving clear usage context.

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