openid_connect_token

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavior. Only states 'exchange a temporary OAuth code for an access token' without mentioning important traits like client_secret requirement, error handling, or support for refresh tokens (evident from schema). Falls short for a security-sensitive token endpoint.

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 sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and efficiently conveys the core action and target use case.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description is too sparse for a 6-parameter OAuth token exchange tool. It misses critical context like the OAuth flow, required client credentials, and use of redirect_uri. Does not adequately prepare an agent to invoke the tool 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so description should explain parameters. Only mentions 'temporary OAuth code' (code) and 'access token' (output), but ignores client_id, client_secret, grant_type, redirect_uri, and refresh_token. Adds minimal meaning beyond the schema structure.

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 it exchanges a temporary OAuth code for an access token for Sign in with Slack, specifying the verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like oauth_v2_access, though the OpenID Connect focus provides some distinction.

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 for Sign in with Slack, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use vs. alternatives (e.g., oauth_v2_exchange) or prerequisites like needing a valid authorization code. No exclusions or context on selecting this tool.

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