Start OAuth

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds only a REST operation tag; it does not explain that this yields an authorization redirect, what the state/codeChallenge parameters are for (PKCE), or how the flow continues.

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?

Very short and front-loaded, with the operation and tag appended compactly. The repeated title 'Start OAuth' as the first line is mild redundancy, but overall there is little wasted text.

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 an OAuth entry-point tool embedded in a large family of auth siblings (finish_o_auth, link_o_auth_account, logout_o_auth), the description omits the flow context an agent needs to sequence calls correctly. With no output schema and only boilerplate parameter docs, the description should carry more, but it does not.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The schema descriptions are boilerplate ('state (request body)'), and the description adds no meaning about what state, redirectUri, or codeChallenge represent — but with the schema nominally documenting the parameters, a 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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Initiate the OAuth authorization process,' plus an operation endpoint (POST /oauth/authorize). This clearly identifies the tool's function. However, it does not distinguish itself from the tightly related sibling immich_finish_o_auth, which an agent would need help separating from this 'start' step.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites, and no reference to the natural follow-up tool immich_finish_o_auth. An agent must infer the flow ordering entirely on its own from the name.

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