Start OIDC device flow

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

Annotations provide minimal hints (not read-only, not destructive, etc.). The description adds that it initiates a flow and returns a user code, but does not disclose potential side effects like session creation, timeouts, or security 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?

Single sentence with 13 words, no wasted text. Front-loaded with the core action and result.

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 parameterless tool without output schema, the description covers the initiation and return value adequately. It could mention next steps or expiration of the code, but it is sufficient for basic understanding.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters (100% coverage trivially). With no parameters, the description does not need to add meaning; baseline 4 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 action ('Initiate OIDC device authorization flow') and the result ('Returns a user code to enter at the verification URL'). It distinguishes from sibling OIDC tools like arcane_oidc_get_config and arcane_oidc_get_status by specifying device flow initiation.

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 (e.g., when to start device flow vs check config). The description only states what it does, not when it's appropriate.

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