connect_meta

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose an important, non-obvious action: 'Abre el navegador para autorizar', indicating an interactive flow. However, it does not explain what happens after authorization (success/failure, token storage, output, or side effects), so transparency is partial.

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 short sentences with no redundant details: purpose, prerequisites, and behavior. The most important information is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.

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 is adequate for selecting the tool, but because there is neither an output schema nor annotations, it leaves unclear what the tool returns and how the agent can tell the OAuth flow succeeded after opening the browser. This is a noticeable gap for an OAuth operation.

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 input schema already documents 100% of the parameters, including default scopes and the exact meaning of clientId/clientSecret. The description adds no significant semantic value beyond repeating that clientId is required and clientSecret is optional.

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?

Starts with a specific verb and resource: 'Inicia el flujo OAuth para conectar Facebook e Instagram'. This clearly separates the tool from siblings such as connect_youtube, and the platform scope is explicit.

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?

States the purpose of the tool and the main prerequisite: need a Facebook app with clientId and optional clientSecret. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives like connect_youtube or mention when not to use the tool, but the platform distinction is clear.

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