Sign In

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

Annotations indicate write and non-idempotent behavior. The description adds the key behavioral detail that session cookies are set for subsequent calls, which is beyond what annotations provide. Could mention session duration or error states, but sufficient for simple auth.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the action, includes essential side effect. No unnecessary words.

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 simple authentication tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is adequate. It explains the action and its primary effect. Minor omissions like session lifetime or error cases are not critical.

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 clear parameter descriptions. The tool description does not add further meaning to the parameters beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 applies.

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 it is for signing in to AFFiNE with email and password, and specifies the side effect of setting session cookies. This distinctively contrasts with sibling auth tools like generate_access_token.

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?

Description implies usage for initial authentication to obtain a session. The parameter description for password suggests preferring API tokens for production, which provides an alternative. However, the main description does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool (e.g., for automated tasks).

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