assetfare

assetfare_v2_session_refresh_action

Idempotent

Refresh an expired, unsubmitted session action by passing the session ID, token, and idempotency key to continue the workflow without resubmitting.

Instructions

Refresh an expired action only while it remains unsubmitted. Example: pass the existing session_id, session_token, and idempotency_key='refresh-0001'. Never refresh a submitted step; AssetFare never signs or submits.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`session_id`	Yes	V2 workflow session UUID returned by assetfare_v2_session_create. Use only with assetfare_v2_session_* tools; do not pass a legacy session ID.
`session_token`	Yes	Sensitive caller-generated v2 session capability: at least 32 CSPRNG bytes encoded as 43-128 URL-safe base64 characters. Generate it locally; never log it or substitute a private key or legacy access token.
`idempotency_key`	Yes	Caller-generated retry key, 8-128 characters. Reuse it only when retrying the same logical mutation; choose a new key for a new operation.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`signed`	Yes
`status`	Yes
`submitted`	Yes
`session_id`	Yes
`current_action`	Yes
`server_signing`	Yes
`action_available`	Yes
`server_submission`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 24, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Beyond the annotations, it warns that AssetFare never signs or submits and that refresh is valid only while the action remains unsubmitted. It doesn't detail the exact effect of refresh or failure mode on misuse, but the safety-critical behavior is disclosed.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences front-load the purpose, include a compact example, and finish with a necessary safety constraint. No filler or repetition.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The rich schema, output schema, and annotations carry most structural context, and the description adds the crucial unsubmitted-only and never-signs/submits constraints. It could define what 'expired' means or mention expected failure behavior, but nothing essential is missing for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema already documents all three parameters in detail (100% coverage), so the description adds little parameter-level meaning. The example shows existing session_id/token and a refresh-specific idempotency key, but that mainly reinforces schema guidance.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: refresh an expired action, and immediately narrows scope to unsubmitted actions. This clearly separates the tool from create/get/observe siblings and from any submit-related step.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives an explicit when (expired, unsubmitted action) and when-not (never on a submitted step). It does not name an alternative tool for submitted actions, so it falls just short of full routing guidance.

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