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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds minimal extra context – it says 'create' which implies a side effect, but does not explain what happens (e.g., external redirect, token generation, or what the authorization link is used for). No mention of prerequisites or consequences.

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?

One clear, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately concise for a zero-parameter tool, though it could add a brief note on the tool's role in the connection flow without becoming verbose.

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 is minimal but sufficient for a zero-parameter action with an output schema. However, it does not explain the tool's position in the connect flow (e.g., that it initiates a sequence with setup_check_facebook_connect), which would help an agent understand sequencing. Given the output schema exists, return values are covered, but the flow context is missing.

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, so there is nothing for the description to explain. Schema coverage is effectively complete; the baseline for zero-parameter tools is high, and no parameter documentation is needed.

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 states a specific action: 'Create a Facebook authorization link' – a clear verb and resource. It distinguishes the tool's purpose from siblings like setup_check_facebook_connect (which checks status) but does not explicitly contrast with setup_begin_channel_connect, so differentiation is partial.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like setup_begin_channel_connect or setup_check_facebook_connect. The context of a multi-step connection flow is implied by the 'begin' prefix but not stated, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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