Debug Token Info

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

With readOnlyHint=true already covering the safety profile, the description usefully scopes the behavior: it reads the *local* session's stored credentials, not arbitrary tokens, and reveals only expiry and refresh-token *presence* rather than token contents. That last point is a meaningful disclosure an agent could not infer from the schema or 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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core behavior and followed by scope and use case. The opening sentence is slightly generic ("Return info about...") and partly restated by the second, but there is no real padding.

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?

An argument-less, read-only diagnostic tool with an output schema needs no further explanation: what it reads, where it reads from, and when to use it are all covered. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly 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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Baseline of 4 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: it returns expiry and refresh-token presence for the local stdio session's stored Fulcra credentials. That is precise enough to distinguish it from data-fetching siblings like get_user_info or get_data_catalog. It does not explicitly contrast itself with the nearest sibling, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

"Useful for diagnosing authentication issues" gives an explicit situational trigger for reaching for this tool. It does not name an alternative or state exclusions, but the context is clear and unlikely to be confused with any other sibling.

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