affiliate_tune_verify_auth

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return format ({ok:true, identity?} or {ok:false, reason}), which is essential behavioral context, and implies a read-only operation. Could be richer but is adequate for a simple 0-param verification tool.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: purpose, when to use, and return format plus pairing advice. Front-loaded with a specific verb and resource, with no fluff.

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 low-complexity 0-param tool with no output schema, the description fully covers purpose, usage timing, return shape, and relationship to a sibling diagnostic tool. Nothing essential is missing.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema is empty, so there is nothing to document. The description correctly implies no inputs are needed, and the baseline for 0-param tools is 4.

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 tool verifies TUNE credentials via a minimal authenticated endpoint. It is specific about the verb (verify), resource (TUNE credentials), and distinguishes itself from sibling verify_auth tools by naming TUNE.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent when to use it: at session start, after key rotation, or after an auth error. It also recommends pairing with affiliate_run_diagnostic for a full health check, providing a clear alternative/complement.

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