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

The description discloses that the config method gives 'permanent, non-expiring connection' and session method is 'session-only', adding context beyond annotations. It also mentions the browser login step. It does not contradict the idempotentHint and provides useful behavioral details.

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 rambling paragraph mixing instructions for the IDE agent and the user. It could be more structured and concise, but it is not excessively long. The opening 'MCP.AI for IDE agents (Cursor, etc.):' is unclear and could be trimmed.

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?

It covers both authentication modes and the no-arg case. It lacks details on return values or error handling for a successful session login, but given the simple interface (one optional parameter) and no output schema, it is reasonably complete for the agent to use.

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 schema has no descriptions, but the description explains the token parameter: 'call with { token: "<jwt>" } after the user pastes, or with no args to get the link.' This fully covers the optional parameter's semantics, including format and when to omit it.

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 states 'log in in the browser, copy the access token' and 'session-only login', clearly indicating this tool authenticates the user. It distinguishes from siblings like 'connect' by focusing on token-based authentication, though the phrasing mixes instructions for the agent and user.

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?

It explicitly says 'Best: add it to this server's config as a header... Or paste it here for a session-only login' and instructs when to use token vs no args, providing clear usage guidance and recommending the permanent config approach.

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