Refresh Session

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

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows the operation is non-destructive and safe to repeat. The description adds no behavioral context beyond naming the resource, e.g., no mention of side effects on the existing token or behavior if the session is invalid. It does not contradict 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?

The description is a single, direct sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded with the action and names the target resource immediately. Every word earns its place.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool with annotations covering safety, the description is nearly complete. It states the action and target. It could mention the effect (e.g., extends token validity) or note a prerequisite that an authenticated session exists, but these are minor gaps for such a simple operation.

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 the schema is an empty object, so the baseline is 4. The description need not explain parameters. The phrase 'current authentication session token' implicitly clarifies that no parameters are needed because the session is identified by the existing token.

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 uses a specific verb ('refresh') and a clear resource (current authentication session token). It is distinct from sibling auth tools like check_session, get_details, invalidate, and logout, so an agent can distinguish it. It does not restate the title alone; it specifies exactly what is refreshed.

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 implies usage: when the current authentication session token needs refreshing. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use it compared to alternatives (e.g., auth_check_session, auth_logout) or state any prerequisites or exclusions. The context is clear enough for a trivial zero-parameter operation, but no guidance is provided.

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