refresh_tokenRe-captures the DeepSeek bearer token from the signed-in browser profile and saves it, restoring authentication when another tool reports an auth rejection.
Re-capture the DeepSeek bearer token from the signed-in browser profile and save it. Use when another tool reports an auth rejection.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description says the tool saves the token ('save it'), a state-mutating action, while annotations declare readOnlyHint=true. That is a direct conflict about side effects; the description also says nothing about behavior when no signed-in browser profile exists.
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 sentences, action first and the trigger condition second, with no filler or repetition of the title.
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?
The description covers what the tool does and when to call it, which is most of what an agent needs. However, with no output schema, it should state what a successful refresh returns and what happens when the credential capture fails, and it never reconciles the persistence side effect with the readOnly annotation.
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 no parameters, so there is nothing for the description to explain; the baseline for a zero-parameter tool applies.
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: re-capture the DeepSeek bearer token from the signed-in browser profile and persist it. That is distinct from every sibling (diagnose, chat, list_files), none of which touch credentials.
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?
Gives an explicit trigger: 'Use when another tool reports an auth rejection.' It does not say when NOT to use it or whether diagnose should be run first to confirm the failure is auth-related, so routing is clear but not fully disambiguated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.