turbosign_setup

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: it reports which credentials are missing and where present ones came from, provides URLs, and explains that open_browser is best-effort with a rationale (no desktop on server). This is rich, honest behavioral context beyond what the schema alone could convey.

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: the first gives primary purpose, the second details outputs and next steps, the third explains the parameter. No filler, no repetition, and front-loaded with the most important usage cue.

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 the tool's low complexity (one optional param) and presence of an output schema, the description covers all necessary context: what it does, what it reports, how to proceed, and parameter behavior. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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 schema has one optional boolean (open_browser) with zero description coverage. The description fully compensates by explaining exactly what setting it to True does, its best-effort nature, and the reason behind it. This adds significant semantic meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 opens with 'Start here on a machine that has never sent a signature request,' which clearly identifies the tool as a setup/diagnostic utility for first-time configuration. It explicitly states it reports missing credentials and provides URLs for obtaining them, distinguishing it from siblings like turbosign_configure and turbosign_send.

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 first sentence provides explicit when-to-use guidance ('never sent a signature request'), and the description instructs to 'call turbosign_configure() with the three values' as the next step, giving a clear sequence. It also explains the optional open_browser behavior, covering edge cases like headless servers.

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