start_leetcode_auth

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses that it opens a browser (if possible) and provides instructions for manual credential extraction via DevTools. This informs the agent about the interactive nature and potential failure mode (if browser cannot open). However, it doesn't specify the return value or the exact instructions content.

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 sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and behavior. It is front-loaded and contains no filler. However, a slightly more structured format (e.g., bullet points) could improve readability for complex flows.

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 absence of an output schema and annotations, the description provides essential information but lacks details about the complete flow, such as what the agent should do after receiving instructions or how to handle credentials. The tool's role in the broader authentication process is only partially explained.

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?

There are no parameters, and the input schema is empty. Schema coverage is 100%, so no additional parameter explanation is needed. The description accurately reflects that no input is required.

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 it initiates the LeetCode authentication flow. It specifies opening a browser and providing instructions for manual credential extraction. This distinctly describes its function and differentiates it from sibling tools like check_auth_status or save_leetcode_credentials.

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 implies when to use the tool (to start authentication) but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternatives. For example, it doesn't say to use check_auth_status first to see if already authenticated. Guidance is somewhat implied but not comprehensive.

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