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

Beyond annotations, the description reveals that a browser authorization link is created, that user interaction is required, that it returns a connect_id, and that polling/credential collection is forbidden. This adds useful behavioral context not present in annotations.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the core behavior, then the workflow constraint and guardrail. No filler or repetition of the schema.

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?

The description states the return values, next step, and explicit negative constraintsтных. Minor omissions like link expiration or idempotency are not critical for the agent to perform the call successfully.

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 only declares channel as a required string with 0% coverage. The description compensates fully by listing the valid values: meta|google_ads|tiktok. That is the only meaningful semantic needed for this parameter.

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?

States a specific action (create browser authorization link), the supported channel values, and the expected return fields (authorize_url, connect_id). It is clearly distinguishable from setup_begin_facebook_connect because it names meta, google_ads, and tiktok.

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?

Provides clear workflow context: have the user finish authorization, then call setup_check_channel_connect oncetjänst. Includes negative guidance (never collect credentials, never poll automatically). Does not explicitly contrast with setup_begin_facebook_connect, but the channel list implies the boundary.

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