Submit the Yandex sign-in code

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

Annotations already indicate this is a mutating action (readOnlyHint=false) and may have external effects (openWorldHint=true). The description adds the copy-paste flow context but does not disclose what happens after submission (e.g., session establishment, error behavior, idempotency). No contradiction with annotations, so a baseline score is appropriate.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the action, the prerequisite, and the parameter source without wasted words. Every clause earns its place.

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?

For a one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is sufficient: it ties the tool to the login flow and specifies exactly what input to provide. The only omission is post-submission behavior, but given the low complexity and high schema coverage, this is not a significant gap.

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 both the schema property description and the tool description explain the 'code' parameter consistently. The description restates the code's origin ('shown on the Yandex page after you approved access') but adds no new semantic detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 specific action: completing a copy-paste sign-in by passing the code Yandex showed. It explicitly references the login sibling tool, making the purpose unambiguous and distinguishing it from other Yandex API tools.

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 clear context by noting this completes a sign-in 'started by login,' implying it should be used after initiating login. It does not explicitly list when not to use it or name alternatives, but the prerequisite and flow are clear enough for an agent to sequence correctly.

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