RAG SharePoint Authorize

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

The description goes beyond the annotations by explaining that the tool starts a sign-in flow and returns a redirect URL. It does not contradict the readOnlyHint (starting a flow is not a mutating operation) and adds useful behavioral context about the immediate result.

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?

A single declarative sentence that is front-loaded with the action, resource, and outcome. No redundant words or irrelevant details.

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 adequately covers the tool's role and output for a simple two-parameter tool. It could mention next steps (e.g., checking auth status), but the overall purpose is sufficiently clear without an output schema.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters (rag_id and redirect_url). The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema, simply echoing that a URL is returned. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Start' with the specific resource 'SharePoint sign-in flow for a knowledge base's source auth' and notes it returns a URL. This differentiates it from sibling tools like lyzr_rag_source_auth_status (status check) and lyzr_rag_source_auth_aci_handoff (handoff).

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 provides clear context: use this to begin the SharePoint sign-in flow for a knowledge base. It does not explicitly list exclusions or compare against sibling tools, but the intended usage is unambiguous from the wording.

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