vibo_capture_session

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

Adds meaningful behavior beyond the annotations: the token is saved locally and reused, and the first use requires approving a pair code shown in the browser. Given readOnlyHint=false, the local write is consistent, and knowing the flow needs human approval is critical for an agent. It omits failure modes (not signed in, no extension) and token expiry/refresh behavior.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first clause, followed by prerequisites and behavior. It is a single dense sentence with multiple em-dash clauses, which is slightly heavy, but every clause carries useful information.

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?

With no output schema and no parameters, the description carries the burden well by explaining prerequisites, the approval step, and token reuse. It could say more about what the tool returns on success/failure or how an agent should behave if the capture fails, but it is largely complete for a 0-param setup tool.

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 takes zero parameters, so the schema is trivially complete and there is nothing for the description to disambiguate at the parameter level. Baseline 4 applies for a no-parameter tool.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Capture your Vibo login ... via ContextMint Bridge') and immediately scopes it to browser-tab capture, which cleanly distinguishes it from the many data-operation siblings. An agent can tell this is the session/authentication setup tool rather than a data tool.

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?

Gives a clear use condition ('for accounts that sign in with Apple/Google/Facebook (no password)') and prerequisites, which implicitly tells the agent this is for SSO accounts. It does not explicitly name an alternative path (e.g., a password login) or state that it should be run before other vibo_* tools, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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