authenticate_gmail

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

Discloses automatic browser opening, a key behavioral trait. However, no annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It omits details about token storage, state changes, or user interaction beyond opening browser.

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?

Extremely concise single sentence (8 words). Action verb is front-loaded. No redundancy or filler.

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?

Adequate for a simple tool but missing context about return value or side effects. No output schema, so description could mention what happens after authentication (e.g., token stored). Slight insufficiency given complexity of authentication.

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?

No parameters in input schema. Description adds no param info, which is acceptable given zero parameters. Baseline is 4 per rules.

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?

Description clearly states the tool authenticates Gmail access via browser. It specifies the action (authenticate), resource (Gmail access), and method (web browser). This distinguishes it from siblings like search_emails or read_email which require prior authentication.

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 use before other Gmail operations but does not explicitly state when to use it, when not to use it, or mention alternatives. No guidance on prerequisites or post-conditions.

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