dl_auth_refresh

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description adds real context beyond them: the call refreshes exactly once, depends on the configured yc profile, and deliberately does not return the token, which tells the agent it cannot read the credential from the response. Error/failure behavior is still undisclosed.

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?

One sentence, no filler, and it front-loads the action (refresh) before the constraints (once, via yc profile, no token returned). Every clause carries information.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema authentication utility, the description covers the essentials: what it does, the profile dependency, single-shot semantics, and the fact that no token is returned. Only failure/expiry behavior is unaddressed, which is a minor gap.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is no per-parameter semantics to convey; the schema already constrains additionalProperties=false. Baseline 4 applies for a zero-parameter tool.

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 a specific verb and resource (refresh the process IAM credential) plus qualifiers that scope the operation: 'once', 'through the configured yc profile', 'without returning the token'. It is clearly distinguishable from dl_auth_check, though it does not explicitly name that sibling.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: 'once' hints at a single, non-repeatable invocation and 'through the configured yc profile' signals a prerequisite (a configured yc profile must exist). There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no pointer to dl_auth_check as the alternative for inspecting credential state.

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