carrefour_refresh_session

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

Without annotations, the description carries most of the transparency burden. It does disclose the source cookie and the fact that automatic refresh/retry is normally handled elsewhere. It stops short of mentioning failure modes or what happens if the stored IAM SSO cookie is invalid, but for a zero-parameter maintenance tool it is reasonably informative.

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 sentences are used, each earning its place: the first states what it does and how, the second explains why it should rarely be called. No filler, no redundancy.

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 parameterless session-refresh tool, the description fully covers its purpose, mechanism, and expected usage frequency. Missing output schema is not an issue because the tool is a side-effect operation rather than one with a meaningful return payload.

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 100% covered by the empty properties definition. Baseline for 0-parameter tools is 4, and the description adds meaningful context by identifying the specific cookie mechanism without needing to describe any parameters.

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 explicitly states the action as 'Force a renewal of the www.carrefour.fr session' and notes the source (stored IAM SSO cookie). It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like carrefour_clear_session or carrefour_browser_login.

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 directly addresses when not to use it: 'Rarely needed by hand' and explains that authenticated requests already refresh and retry on their own. This gives clear guidance that the tool is only for exceptional forced manual renewal.

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