refresh_auth

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the action ('re-extract CSRF and session from page') but does not disclose side effects, whether existing tokens are invalidated, or any permissions/auth requirements. For a mutation-like refresh operation, this is a significant transparency gap.

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 concise sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and includes relevant specifics in parentheses, earning full marks for structure and brevity.

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 simplicity (no params, no output schema), the description is largely complete. It explains the purpose and mechanism ('re-extract from page'). However, it lacks context about when to invoke it relative to save_auth_tokens, and the 'page' dependency is implicit, so it is not a perfect 5.

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, so the input schema provides no actionable information. The description adds meaning by explaining what the tool does with no inputs, which is the only relevant semantic content. Baseline 4 is appropriate.

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 ('Reload') and clearly identifies the resource ('authentication tokens') with details (CSRF and session). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'save_auth_tokens' by implying a refresh rather than initial save.

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 like save_auth_tokens. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., having a loaded page) or typical scenarios (e.g., token expiration).

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