login

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavior. It mentions authentication and token return, but lacks details on side effects like session creation, token expiration, or security implications (e.g., credentials not stored). The description is minimal for a security-sensitive 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 is appropriately front-loaded with the action verb 'Authenticate', making it efficient.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly states it 'Returns an API token', which is essential. However, it does not elaborate on token format, expiry, or how to use it in subsequent requests. Given the sibling 'refresh_token', more detail on token lifecycle would improve completeness.

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% with both parameters described. The description adds no extra meaning beyond restating 'username and password'. Since the schema already defines them adequately, the description provides no additional value for parameter understanding.

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 'Authenticate' and specific resource 'external platform using username and password', and explicitly mentions the outcome of returning an API token. It distinguishes well from sibling tools like create_entity, delete_entity, etc., as authentication is a distinct operation.

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 implies usage for initial authentication via 'can be used for subsequent requests', but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus the sibling 'refresh_token'. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned, leaving some ambiguity for an agent.

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