auth

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

Description discloses critical behaviors beyond annotations: auto-refresh with 90-day window, token persistence to file, headless vs browser flow details. Annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) don't contradict, and description enriches with operational context.

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?

Front-loaded with overall purpose, then organized by action. Each sentence provides necessary detail. Slightly long due to multiple action descriptions, but no padding. Could be slightly tighter but well-structured.

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?

No output schema, but description explains what each action returns (auth state, code+URL, diagnostic info). Covers token persistence, prerequisites, and workflow for device code. Fully sufficient for agent to understand and invoke 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 has 100% coverage with descriptions for all 3 parameters. Description adds value by clarifying defaults (action defaults to status, method defaults to device-code) and explaining force behavior. No contradictions.

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?

Clear verb 'Manage authentication' with specific resource 'Microsoft Graph API'. Lists four distinct actions (status, authenticate, device-code-complete, about) with no ambiguity. Distinct from all sibling tools, which are not authentication-related.

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?

Explicitly states 'call this first to check before other tools'. Provides detailed when-to-use for each action, including prerequisites for browser method ('run npm run auth-server first') and force flag usage. No exclusions needed as sibling tools are unrelated.

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