Onboard

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

The description discloses many behaviors: it is 'Idempotent and re-entrant', involves human interaction in steps, reads 'X cookies', opens a browser, prompts for consent, and warns about native consent prompts. It explicitly states 'when one applies, this tool warns you before it appears.' This is transparent.

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 structured with numbered steps and bullet points, making it scannable. It is front-loaded with the core purpose. However, it is somewhat verbose with detailed explanations about browser quirks, but that serves a purpose.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, usage sequence, parameter meanings, and notes a follow-up action ('Then call oracle'). It also explains the idempotent nature and human interaction requirements. Given the complexity, it is complete.

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?

All four parameters are explained in the description: browser_profile, guided_login, consent, and skip_github. For example, it says 'browser_profile — which Chrome profile holds your X session' and lists consent options. Since the schema has no descriptions, this fully compensates.

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 verb 'Set up' and the resource 'OPYT' on this machine. It also specifies when to call it: 'first on a fresh install' and 'any time setup looks incomplete.' This gives a precise purpose.

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?

It provides usage context by saying 'Call this first' and then 'Then call oracle to choose who to trust,' establishing a sequence. It also mentions optional parameters like skip_github. However, it doesn't explicitly describe alternatives among sibling tools, but the guidance is sufficient for a setup tool.

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