setup_auth

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that a visible Chrome window is opened, implying user interaction. However, it doesn't mention what happens after login, whether the process completes automatically, or any side effects beyond opening the window. Some behavioral transparency is present, but gaps remain.

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 two short sentences. The first states the primary purpose, the second provides conditional usage for the parameter. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and parameter behavior. It doesn't specify return values or failure modes, but these may not be critical for an authentication tool. The description is sufficiently complete for the tool's simplicity.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does so by explaining the 'force' parameter with a specific condition, giving it semantic meaning beyond the bare boolean type. The description effectively documents the parameter's purpose and appropriate usage.

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's action ('Open a visible Chrome window') and its purpose ('secure Google login'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools which are all research/notebook related, making it obvious this is an authentication 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?

Provides explicit guidance for when to set force=true: 'when cookies look valid locally but Google redirects to sign-in.' This gives clear conditional usage for the parameter. It doesn't explicitly discuss when to use this tool versus alternatives, but the sibling tools are unrelated, so the intended use is clear.

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