Connecter ou créer un compte Greenweez

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

Annotations provide idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description adds the useful detail that credentials remain on Greenweez (data stays on the destination), which is a meaningful addition. However, it doesn't disclose more about the wizard behavior or potential side effects beyond what annotations cover.

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?

Description is a single concise sentence plus a security-relevant note. It's efficient and front-loaded with the main purpose. The second sentence adds the credential-handling detail which is valuable context, not waste.

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 zero-parameter tool that opens a local wizard, the description covers purpose, scope, and the security property of credentials. It's complete for the simple nature of this tool, though it could mention what user action is expected after the wizard opens.

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 0 parameters with 100% schema coverage, so per rubric the baseline is 4. There is nothing for the description to add about parameters since none exist; the description correctly explains the tool needs no inputs and returns a wizard.

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 it returns a wizard with two links for login or account creation, with a specific verb+resource. It differentiates the connection/auth purpose from the sibling shopping-cart tools. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with siblings beyond the implicit scope difference.

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 usage (when a user wants to connect or create a Greenweez account) but provides no exclusions or comparison to alternatives. It doesn't state when NOT to use this tool or point to other tools for related flows.

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