Refresh the Informer API description

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

The description explicitly states the scope and side effects: it only touches this server's tool definitions, never bookkeeping data, and requires no restart. Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, and the description aligns with them, adding context about tool visibility changes.

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?

Three tightly written sentences cover function, use cases, and side effects with no filler. The most important action is front-loaded, and all information earns its place.

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 single-parameter management tool with no output schema, the description covers the operation's purpose, trigger conditions, dry-run option, and impact boundary. Nothing needed for correct invocation is missing.

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 only parameter, dry_run, is fully documented in the schema with a clear description and default. The tool description repeats essentially the same information in natural language, adding no new semantic meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.

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 states a precise verb and resource: it downloads the current OpenAPI description and updates this server's tools to match, without restarting. It also clearly distinguishes itself from the many business CRUD sibling tools by being a server-management operation.

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?

It gives explicit conditions for when to use it: when an expected endpoint is missing, when an argument is rejected as unknown, or to check for changes. It also instructs passing dry_run to preview differences, and clarifies what the tool does not affect.

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