NotebookLM MCP

Refresh NotebookLM session

auth_refresh

Idempotent

Refreshes the NotebookLM session by re-reading the page with saved cookies to renew the CSRF token and session ID after an authentication error, then retry.

Instructions

Re-read the NotebookLM page with the saved cookies to refresh the CSRF token and session ID. Returns a confirmation, or an authentication error if the Google session is signed out; then ask the user to run npx -y @m4ykeldev/notebooklm-mcp auth in a terminal. Call it once after an auth error, then retry.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "auth_refresh"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`status`	Yes
`message`	No	Human-readable outcome or next step

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.5.0Oct 20, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "message": {
+      "description": "Human-readable outcome or next step",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "const": "success",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "status"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Addedv0.4.0Oct 20, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (idempotent, non-destructive, open-world), but the description adds real context beyond them: it reads the live page with saved cookies, its failure mode is an auth error when the Google session is signed out, and the remediation path. It stops short of describing how a stale/missing cookie differs from a signed-out state.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loads the action and its mechanism, then failure handling and the call-once instruction. Compact overall, though the semicolon clause carrying the remediation command is slightly awkward to parse.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-parameter session-refresh tool with an output schema already documenting return values, the description covers mechanism, failure mode, and next step. An agent has everything needed to call it correctly and react to failure.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes no parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly adds no parameter detail because none exists; there is nothing the schema fails to cover.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (re-read/refresh) and resource (CSRF token and session ID) and explains the mechanism (saved cookies). An agent can distinguish it from the auth_save_tokens sibling by the 'refresh existing session' framing.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly states when to call it ('once after an auth error, then retry') and what to do on failure (direct the user to run the CLI auth command). It does not contrast with the sibling auth_save_tokens, so the save-vs-refresh choice is left to inference.

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