reload_config

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('reload') but doesn't explain what this entails—e.g., whether it interrupts bot operations, requires specific permissions, or has side effects like resetting state. The mention of 'error if failed' hints at potential failure modes but lacks detail.

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 action but includes unnecessary parameter and return details that don't align with the actual schema (e.g., mentioning 'ctx' parameter and return types). This adds clutter without value, reducing efficiency.

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 complexity of a configuration reload operation, the description is inadequate. With no annotations, no output schema, and minimal behavioral context, it fails to address key aspects like safety, side effects, or return format. It should explain more about what 'reload' means in this bot context.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description includes a 'ctx' parameter in its text, but this is extraneous since the schema shows no parameters. This minor inconsistency doesn't significantly detract, as the baseline for 0 parameters is 4.

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 verb ('reload') and resource ('bot configuration'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from its siblings like 'fetch_config' or 'start_bot/stop_bot', which would require a 5.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'fetch_config' or 'start_bot/stop_bot'. It also doesn't mention prerequisites, such as whether the bot must be running or stopped, or if this is safe during active trading.

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