complete_google_auth

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It mentions input methods but does not disclose side effects (e.g., token creation/overwrite), error conditions, or idempotency. Vague about what happens on repeated calls.

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?

Extremely concise (two sentences) with front-loaded purpose and no wasted words. Efficient for an AI agent to parse.

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?

Covers the OAuth completion flow and input methods. Mentions prerequisite start_google_auth. But omits details on output (despite output schema existing) and does not explain required parameters. Somewhat incomplete for a complex auth flow.

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?

Low schema coverage (0%) but description adds meaning for three parameters (callback_url preference, fallback others). However, required parameters service_name and user_google_email are not explained, leaving gaps.

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?

Description clearly states the tool completes Google OAuth after start_google_auth, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling start_google_auth and explains preferred vs fallback input.

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?

Describes preferred input (callback_url) and fallback (authorization_code + state) with clear conditions. Implies usage after start_google_auth, but lacks explicit when-not-to-use or comparison to other auth tools.

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