regenerate_docqa_token

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

No annotations provided, so description must carry full burden. It indicates mutation and requires confirmation for dangerous action, but lacks details on side effects (e.g., old token invalidation), reversibility, or impact on active sessions.

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?

Very concise: two lines cover purpose, mutation flag, and confirmation requirement. No wasted words.

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 no output schema and simple parameters, description covers core purpose and safety confirmation. However, for a mutation tool, additional behavioral details (e.g., old token status) would improve completeness.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. The description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 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 clearly states the tool regenerates a token for a Doc-QA assistant, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'create_docqa_assistant' by focusing on token regeneration and explicitly marking it as a mutation.

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 mentions the need for confirmation (confirm=true) to execute, but does not provide when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'regenerate_plugin_token' or prerequisites (e.g., assistant must exist). No explicit usage context or exclusions.

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