insta_auth_complete

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

Without annotations, the description discloses critical behavior: the token is not output and is saved only in Credential Manager. This informs the agent that the tool does not return credentials, which is important for security.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Every part adds value.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the core behavior but lacks context on success/failure indications, prerequisites (e.g., matching state), and rate limits. It is minimally complete for a simple auth tool.

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%, yet the description does not explain the parameters 'code' or 'state' beyond the generic 'by code'. It fails to add meaning that minimally helps the agent, such as explaining that 'state' is for CSRF protection.

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 action (complete OAuth connection) and the resource (OAuth connection via code). It distinguishes from sibling tools which are about direct messaging and comments, so purpose is clear.

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 after obtaining an authorization code, but does not explicitly state when to use or when not to use. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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