auth_setup

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

With no annotations, the description should fully disclose behavior. It only says 'save... token', implying a write operation, but omits any side effects, permissions needed, or what constitutes success/failure. The mention of token prefix 'y0_...' is a minor plus.

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?

Two sentences, no redundancy. The first sentence conveys the core purpose, the second offers contextual alternatives and help. Could be slightly more efficient by integrating parameter hints.

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 3 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain parameter roles, return values, or error cases, leaving the agent to rely on external tool_help.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description provides no meaning for any of the 3 parameters. The instruction to 'call tool_help' does not add semantic value to the parameters themselves.

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 action ('Save a ready-made direct OAuth token') and the resource ('direct auth profile'), and distinguishes from the sibling tool auth_login by specifying the type of token flow.

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 explicitly tells when to use auth_login instead ('use auth_login for the interactive browser flow'), providing an alternative. It also directs users to tool_help for parameters, which is helpful but doesn't give detailed context.

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