linkedin_authenticate

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It explains that the tool returns a URL requiring browser interaction and that authentication is not complete until linkedin_auth_status is called. This is valuable behavioral context beyond what any structured field provides.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and followed by concise step-by-step guidance. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or fluff.

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 initiating a simple two-step OAuth flow, the description covers the essential workflow: initiating the sign-in, handling the returned URL, and proceeding to the status check. It could specify the response shape or error cases, but it is complete enough for an agent to act successfully.

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 zero parameters, so there is no schema to explain. A baseline of 4 is appropriate given that the description does not need to compensate for missing parameter documentation.

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 'Start LinkedIn OAuth sign-in' with a specific verb and resource, unambiguously identifying the tool's function. It distinguishes itself from siblings like linkedin_auth_status (which checks status) and linkedin_get_my_profile (which fetches profile data).

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 sequential instructions: open the returned URL, approve access, then call linkedin_auth_status. It names the next tool, effectively giving an alternative/next step and clarifying when to use this tool versus the status tool.

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