vibe_token

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states the action (setting a token) but does not disclose whether it overwrites an existing token, persists across sessions, or validates the token. It is not misleading, but lacks depth on side effects or state changes.

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?

Two sentences with zero fluff. The primary action is front-loaded, and the usage context follows. Every word contributes to the tool's purpose.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, this description is adequate. It covers the action and the required prerequisite (OAuth). It does not explain potential errors or token persistence, but these are minor for a simple setter. It is complete enough for an agent to call it correctly.

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?

The schema already fully describes the parameter 'token' with 100% coverage. The description simply repeats it ('Set your auth token') without adding syntax, format, or validation details. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('Set your auth token') and the resource (auth token). It is specific enough to distinguish from siblings like vibe_status or vibe_dm, none of which relate to authentication. A slight improvement could be explicitly naming that it is for authentication setup, but it is clear.

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 gives a clear usage context: 'Use after completing GitHub OAuth in browser.' This tells an agent when to invoke it. It does not provide exclusions or alternatives, but the context is sufficient for a simple tool with no obvious alternatives.

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