regenerate_operator_token

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full disclosure burden. It explicitly states the token is invalidated, the action is irreversible, returns the new token value, and requires explicit user confirmation before proceeding. This covers key behavioral consequences and prerequisites beyond what the tool name alone implies.

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 three sentences, each earning its place: purpose, return value, and critical warnings. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, followed by necessary cautionary notes. No redundant or vague filler.

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 (0 params, no output schema) and the description fully covers what it does, what it returns ('the new token value'), and the critical downside (invalidates current token, irreversible). The confirmation requirement is also included, making the description complete for safe invocation.

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 and an empty input schema, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter details because none exist, which is appropriate and sufficient.

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 'Regenerate the InfluxDB operator token' which is a specific verb+resource combination. It also scopes to 'Core/Enterprise only,' distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_admin_token or cloud_create_database_token. The focus on 'operator token' uniquely identifies its purpose.

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 provides clear context: it is for Core/Enterprise, requires explicit user confirmation, and emphasizes irreversibility. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the 'only' scope and uniqueness of the operator token implicitly guide usage. It falls short of a 5 by not mentioning when not to use or alternative token operations.

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