refresh_live_releases_cache

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses that the tool makes network requests to MusicBrainz, adheres to the User-Agent policy via MCP_CONTACT, caches results locally, can force re-fetching, and returns a summary with totals and cache path. It also mentions retry behavior for transient errors.

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 well-structured: a concise summary, usage context, requirements, parameter list, and return description. Every sentence adds value without verbosity.

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 lack of an output schema, the description includes a Returns section detailing the summary contents. It covers purpose, prerequisites, parameters, and behavior, making it self-contained for an AI agent to decide when and how to call this 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 schema provides only types and defaults with zero descriptions. The description's Args section explains each parameter: artist_mbid (defaults to King Crimson), max_pages (safety cap), max_retries (retry on transient errors), and force (re-fetch even if cache exists). This fully compensates for the lack of schema 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 fetches King Crimson's official live releases from MusicBrainz and caches them locally, parsing recording dates. This distinguishes it from sibling cache tools (refresh_setlist_cache, refresh_box_sets_cache) by focusing on live releases and mentioning its role in song_live_releases.

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 says it is used by song_live_releases to map songs to live albums, and notes that the live catalog is fixed so it rarely needs re-running. This provides clear context for when to invoke it, though it does not explicitly discuss alternatives or exclusions.

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