configure_oauth

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Configure' (implying a write operation) but does not mention prerequisites (e.g., scan config must exist), effects on existing OAuth settings, security implications (e.g., client secret storage), or idempotency. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 a single, clear sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the primary action and resource, making it easy to parse and remember.

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 the moderate complexity (10 parameters, 5 required), no output schema, and lack of annotations, the description is too sparse to be fully self-contained. It does not explain what 'configure' entails, any required setup, or how this relates to other scan configuration tools, leaving important gaps for the agent.

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 100%, with all ten parameters having descriptive names and descriptions. The tool description adds no parameter-specific detail, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema already provides full semantic coverage.

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 verb 'Configure' and the resource 'OAuth 2.0 authentication for a scan configuration', which is specific and distinguishes this tool from sibling configure_* tools (e.g., configure_form_auth, configure_token_replacement). The purpose is unambiguous and well-scoped.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With multiple configure_* siblings, the absence of any comparative or conditional context (e.g., 'use when OAuth is required') means the agent must infer usage solely from the tool name and minimal description.

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