tooling_tokens_rotate

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The phrase 'Rotate OAuth tokens' is too vague to convey any behavioral traits like destructive nature (old token invalidation?), authorization requirements, or rate limits. Essential behavioral context is missing.

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?

While the description is only three words, it is not appropriately concise; it omits crucial information. Conciseness should not come at the cost of clarity. The description fails to earn its minimal size because it leaves the agent guessing about essential details.

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?

Given the tool's four parameters, no annotations, and an output schema that is not referenced, the description is insufficient. It explains neither the input significance nor the output nature, leaving the agent without enough context to use the tool correctly.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain the parameters. It does not mention any of the four parameters (refresh_token, client_id, client_secret, grant_type). The agent receives no guidance on what these fields represent or how to use them, resulting in a severe gap.

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 'Rotate OAuth tokens' clearly states the verb (rotate) and resource (OAuth tokens). It distinguishes from sibling tools like oauth_access or oauth_v2_exchange, as 'rotate' implies replacing an existing token, not acquiring an initial one. However, it lacks specificity about the context (tooling) and what exactly rotating entails.

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 such as oauth_access or oauth_v2_exchange. The description does not indicate prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions, leaving the AI agent uninformed about appropriate context.

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