tenki_touch_preview

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

Annotations already signal that the operation is not read-only and not idempotent. The description adds useful context about the idle-teardown prevention behavior, but does not disclose details such as side effects, what happens with invalid/expired tokens, or whether the refresh resets an internal timer. No contradiction with annotations.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every part contributes to understanding the action, the target, and the reason, making it highly efficient.

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 one-parameter tool with a fully documented schema and annotations covering safety traits, the description provides enough context for an agent to invoke it correctly. It does not describe response behavior or error conditions, but those are not essential for making the call.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents preview_token and its source. The description only repeats the token requirement without adding new semantic meaning beyond the schema, matching the baseline for full schema coverage.

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 uses a specific verb ('Refresh (keep-alive)') with a clear resource ('a live preview by its preview token') and states the intended effect ('so it isn't torn down as idle'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling preview tools like create_preview_url or delete_preview_url.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool: when a live preview exists and the agent wants to keep it alive using its preview token. It does not explicitly list alternatives or exclusions, but the intended usage scenario is unambiguous.

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