refresh_token_info

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

No annotations provided; description sufficiently discloses the read-only nature and what information is returned (validity, expiration, scopes). No destructive behavior or side effects implied.

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?

Two concise sentences with front-loaded purpose. No extraneous words.

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?

For a low-complexity tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the return information (validity, expiration, scopes) and usage context. Slightly lacks mention of error cases but acceptable.

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 coverage is 100%; description adds value by specifying the optional parameter's default (FB_PAGE_ACCESS_TOKEN env var), clarifying behavior beyond the schema.

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 verb 'inspect' and the resource 'access token', listing specific attributes (validity, expiration, scopes). Distinct from sibling tools focused on page data and posts.

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?

Explicitly states usefulness for diagnosing auth issues, implying when to use. No sibling tool overlaps in function, so no need for exclusion criteria.

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