linear_auth_callback

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only says 'Handle OAuth callback' without detailing what side effects occur (e.g., token creation, session setup), error conditions, or whether it is idempotent. This is insufficient for an AI agent to understand behavioral implications.

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 with one short sentence. It is front-loaded and not verbose, though it could be improved by slightly expanding to include key context.

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), the description should at least mention that this completes OAuth authentication and may return tokens. It lacks mention of return value or error handling, making it incomplete for an AI agent.

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% and the description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema's 'OAuth authorization code' for the 'code' parameter. Baseline is 3 since schema fully describes the 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?

The description 'Handle OAuth callback' clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from other sibling tools which are all Linear API operations, none of which are OAuth-related.

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 is provided on when or when not to use this tool compared to alternatives. While the context implies it should be used after an OAuth redirect, there is no explicit instruction or mention of prerequisites like a state parameter for CSRF protection.

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