passgage_refresh_token

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

The description provides minimal behavioral disclosure beyond the tool's name. It states that the token's validity is extended, but it does not mention whether the old token is invalidated, whether authentication is required, what the response format is, or any side effects. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and fails to address these aspects.

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 sentence that is concise and front-loaded. Every word contributes meaning, and there is no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 simple token refresh operation with no parameters or output schema, the description conveys the core action and result. However, it omits details about the return value (e.g., the new token or expiry time) and any edge cases (e.g., what happens if the token is already expired). Given the low complexity, this is a minor gap, but the description could be more complete.

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 empty. The description adds meaning by specifying that the operation applies to the 'current JWT token', clarifying that the token is implicitly obtained from the session context rather than supplied as a parameter. This is valuable context beyond the schema.

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 clearly states an action 'Refresh the current JWT token' with a specific goal 'to extend its validity'. It uses a specific verb and resource, and it is distinct from sibling tools like passgage_login and passgage_logout, which handle authentication lifecycle differently.

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 phrase 'to extend its validity' implies usage when the current token's validity needs to be prolonged, giving some context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as passgage_login or passgage_logout, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites.

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