Refresh catalog

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

Annotations already flag destructive behavior, and the description adds meaningful context by specifying admin-only access and the source of catalog data. It does not repeat or contradict the annotations, though it could mention that the active catalog is replaced.

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?

Two short front-loaded sentences place the most operationally important constraint (admin-only) first and add a useful source detail without filler. Everything else is left to the schema and annotations.

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 full parameter documentation, an output schema, and destructive annotation present, the description is nearly sufficient. It lacks explicit side-effect context about replacing the active catalog, but rollback behavior is captured in the parameter schema.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, including the force compatibility caveat and rollback semantics. The description itself adds no parameter detail, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

States an explicit verb (Refresh), a clear resource (endpoint catalog), and a source (JustOneAPI OpenAPI documents). The admin-only scoping further distinguishes it from read/query siblings like search_endpoints and call_endpoint.

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 only usage guidance is the admin-only precondition; it does not state when to refresh or explicitly contrast with siblings such as 'use search_endpoints to query the catalog.' Usage is implied rather than fully specified.

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