Exchange Withings OAuth Code

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

The description discloses that tokens are stored locally and never returned, which is critical behavioral context. Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false but the description adds clarity on side effects and data handling. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

The description is a single 20-word sentence, front-loading the main action and key constraints. No superfluous information. Highly efficient.

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?

The description covers the essential purpose and behavior. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., needing to call withings_get_auth_url first) but given the sibling context, this is acceptable. The existence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values. Minor gap in completeness.

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 description coverage is 50% (code parameter covered, response_format not). The description mentions the code parameter but adds no new meaning beyond the schema. The schema already describes both parameters adequately. Baseline 3 applies.

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 exchanges an OAuth authorization code for local tokens, using a signed request flow. This distinguishes it from siblings like withings_get_auth_url which obtains the initial code. The verb 'exchange' and resource 'OAuth authorization code' are specific.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when tokens are already available. It implies usage after obtaining an auth code but provides no guidance on prerequisites or exclusions. Adequate but lacks explicit context.

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