finish_google_oauth

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions exchanging for tokens but does not disclose side effects like token storage, overwriting, or authentication requirements. For a sensitive OAuth tool, more detail is needed.

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 fluff, front-loaded with the key purpose. Every word earns its place.

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?

No output schema exists, but description only mentions tokens without details on return format or error handling. OAuth flow complexity and parameters like state validation are not elaborated. Description feels incomplete for a sensitive operation.

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 baseline is 3. Description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides for parameters like code, state, redirect_uri, and expected_state.

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 the verb-process and complete-and resource-Google OAuth callback, specifying the action of exchanging authorization code for tokens. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like start_google_oauth.

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?

Description implies usage after receiving OAuth callback, but does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives or provide exclusions. No negative guidance is given.

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