Exchange Google OAuth Code

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

Beyond annotations (which indicate write operation), the description adds critical behavioral details: file storage location with permissions and that tokens are never returned in response. This enhances transparency.

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, front-loaded with purpose, no unnecessary words. Highly concise and structured well.

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 output schema existence, description need not detail returns. But it misses positioning in OAuth flow (e.g., prerequisite of auth URL). Still adequate for a simple exchange 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?

Schema coverage is 50% (response_format lacks description in schema). The tool description does not elaborate on either parameter, leaving the role of response_format unclear. Description fails to compensate for coverage gap.

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 verb 'Exchange' and specific resources 'Google OAuth authorization code' and 'local tokens'. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like google_ads_get_auth_url and google_ads_revoke_access.

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 usage after obtaining an auth code, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives or prerequisites. Context from sibling name get_auth_url suggests a flow, but not stated.

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