reload_actions

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

Annotations include readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds behavioral context by noting 'No approval needed — read-only' and indicating that it forces an immediate refresh. This goes beyond the annotation without contradicting it, though it could be more detailed about side effects or response behavior.

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 three concise sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: stating the core action, providing usage timing, and noting safety/read-only nature. Every sentence earns its place with no redundant 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?

With zero parameters and an output schema provided, the description fully covers what an agent needs to know: the tool's function, when to use it, and its non-destructive nature. It is complete for this simple tool.

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 has zero parameters, so there is nothing to document beyond the schema. Per the baseline, 0 params earns a 4; the description appropriately focuses on the action rather than parameter semantics.

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's function with a specific verb ('Force an immediate refresh') and identifies the resource ('OliveTin action catalog from GetDashboard'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_olivetin_actions, making its purpose 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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use this after adding, removing, or editing actions in OliveTin config without waiting for the automatic refresh interval.' This gives clear context but does not mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it falls slightly short of a 5.

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