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

The description explains that calling with a token establishes session-only authentication, calling without args returns a login link, and config-based auth is permanent and non-expiring. This adds meaningful context beyond the annotations, though it does not detail side effects like token invalidation or existing session replacement.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose, but it packs multiple alternatives into a long first sentence with colons and semicolons. Still, every sentence contributes necessary information, so it remains reasonably concise.

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 tool’s simple single-optional-parameter schema and lack of output schema, the description is complete: it covers both call modes, explains the distinction between permanent and session-only auth, and indicates what happens with no arguments. No important context is missing.

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?

Although the schema provides no description for `token` and coverage is 0%, the tool description fully compensates: it specifies the token is a JWT, should be passed as `token: "<jwt>"`, and that omitting it triggers the login-link flow. This is complete parameter semantics.

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 this tool handles MCP.AI authentication for IDE agents, covering browser login, token capture, and configuring a permanent or session-only connection. It goes beyond a simple restatement of the tool name and explains the full purpose.

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?

Provides explicit usage guidance: add the token as an Authorization header for a permanent connection, or call the tool with a token for session-only login, or call it with no args to get a login link. This clearly tells the agent when and how to invoke each mode.

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