Connect account

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is partly covered; the description adds the important behavioral fact that this is a human-in-the-loop step producing a URL to be opened externally. It omits whether the URL expires or is single-use, which would have completed the picture.

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?

One tight sentence, front-loaded with the action and followed by the user-facing consequence. Nothing wasted.

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?

For a two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description conveys the essential flow but leaves gaps: it never states what the response contains (the URL field), nor what the optional 'client' parameter changes. Adequate but not 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?

Schema coverage is only 50%: the platform parameter points to describe_platform, but the 'client' enum (web/mobile) has no description anywhere. The description says nothing about either parameter or how 'client' affects the generated URL, so it does not compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

Specific verb+resource: it builds an OAuth authorize URL for a given platform, and clarifies the result is a URL the user opens rather than a completed connection. That separates it from siblings like refresh_account and disconnect_account, though it doesn't name them explicitly.

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 phrase 'the user opens it in a browser to connect' implies the context of use (initiating a connection flow), but there is no explicit when/when-not guidance and no comparison to refresh_account or check_setup.

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