Extend this profile's token by 60 days

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

Annotations already mark this as non-read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent. The description adds valuable context beyond the annotations: the automatic refresh window, the manual force-now behavior, and the lifetime constraints. It does not specify what happens when the token is outside the refresh window, but the lifecycle guidance largely covers expected behavior.

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?

Three sentences with no filler. The primary action is front-loaded, followed by the crucial lifecycle constraints, and the optional/manual nature of the call is clarified at the end. Every sentence 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 single-optional-parameter, no-output-schema tool with rich annotations, this description is complete. It explains what the tool does, when it can be called, when it cannot, and why an agent would call it manually instead of relying on the server's automatic refresh.

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 only parameter, 'account', is fully documented in the schema with type, username example, default behavior, and a pointer to list_accounts. With 100% schema description coverage, the description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline score of 3 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 names a specific verb ('Refresh'), the exact resource ('long-lived access token'), and the concrete outcome ('another 60 days'). It clearly distinguishes itself from the sibling tools by focusing on token lifecycle rather than posting, lookup, or account listing.

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?

It gives explicit validity conditions: a token can be refreshed once it is 24 hours old and never after expiry. It also tells the agent when the tool is unnecessary (because the server auto-refreshes) and what to do for expired tokens (authorise again), which is an effective alternative.

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