start_google_auth

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the behavior of initiating OAuth, mentions the automatic authentication flow, and explains when manual initiation is appropriate. It does not detail side effects like user prompts or credential storage, but it provides solid behavioral context beyond a minimal statement.

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?

The description is well-structured with a lead sentence and a bullet-style NOTE section. It is slightly repetitive in the final 'In most cases' sentence, which restates the earlier automatic-handling point, but overall it is efficient and scannable.

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 simple authentication tool, the description covers purpose, typical usage, and alternatives well. It lacks parameter-level detail and specifics about authentication state outcomes, but given the presence of an output schema and the low operational complexity, it is largely 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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain either 'service_name' or 'user_google_email'. The names are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description adds no meaning beyond the schema, leaving the required parameter and the optional email parameter underspecified.

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 a specific action ('Manually initiate Google OAuth authentication flow') and explicitly distinguishes this tool from normal usage by noting it should typically not be called directly. It clarifies the resource (Google OAuth) and the trigger conditions, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance with numbered scenarios, explicitly states when NOT to use it, and names the alternative approach ('simply try calling the Google Workspace tool you need'). This is exemplary usage guidance.

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