appflowy_refresh_token

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states that tokens are not returned, but fails to mention other important behaviors such as session invalidation, expiration, auth requirements, or side effects. This is a significant gap for a token management tool.

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 extremely concise at two sentences and 17 words. Every word adds value, and the most important information ('refresh the access token') is front-loaded. No fluff or redundant information.

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 (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. However, typical token refresh flows include details like when refresh is needed, error conditions, or side effects. The description lacks this context.

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 schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds value by explaining that the refresh_token parameter is optional and defaults to using a stored token. However, it does not describe the format or source of the stored token, leaving some ambiguity.

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 action ('refresh the access token') and the resource ('access token'). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like login by specifying the token refresh mechanism. However, it could be more specific about when this tool is used in the authentication flow.

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 provides some guidance on usage ('uses the stored refresh token unless one is provided'), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like appflowy_login or other auth-related tools. No when-not-to-use or alternative tools are mentioned.

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