Auth Status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, and the description adds useful context about what the tool reports and how to perform reauthentication. This goes beyond the structured fields and clarifies the tool's read-only behavior.

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 concise sentences. The first sentence front-loads what the tool reports, and the second provides actionable guidance. No wasted words.

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 the tool's simplicity, zero parameters, and presence of an output schema, the description fully covers its purpose and usage. It also provides the relevant reauthentication context, making it complete for an AI agent.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the schema description coverage is 100% and the description correctly states 'No parameters.' The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description appropriately acknowledges this.

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 identifies the tool as reporting token status, expiry, token-file path, and README link. It distinguishes this auth-focused tool from sibling meeting/recording tools.

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 states explicitly that there are no parameters and provides the action to (re)authenticate by placing a Session token in the token_file. This gives clear context for when to use the tool and what to do if authentication is needed, though it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools.

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