refresh_youtube_token

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits on its own. It only states the action 'refresh' but does not mention that it mutates state, requires existing OAuth credentials, might fail if the token is not expired, or what side effects occur (e.g., invalidating the current token). The description is too sparse to inform the agent about consequences.

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 short phrase, extremely concise and easy to parse. It is appropriately sized for a zero-parameter tool, though it could be slightly longer to add context without becoming verbose.

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 tool is simple in terms of parameters, but it has an output schema (not described) and is part of a family of OAuth-related tools. The description does not mention what the refresh operation returns, whether it requires prior setup, or any error conditions. For an agent to use this correctly, it needs to know that it should only be called after OAuth setup and that it will update the stored token. This context is missing.

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 has zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100% and the description needs to add no parameter details. The baseline of 4 applies; there is no missing parameter information.

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 action (refresh) and the target (YouTube access token), and the word '手动' (manually) distinguishes it from the sibling tool auto_refresh_youtube_token_if_needed. The purpose is unambiguous even without seeing the schema.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites like completing OAuth setup, or that this should be used only when auto-refresh is not appropriate. An agent has no way to know when to choose this over auto_refresh_youtube_token_if_needed.

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