auth

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It lists actions but does not mention side effects such as opening a browser for login, invalidating sessions on logout, or the interactive nature of reauth. This lack of detail reduces transparency.

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 concise sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded with the keyword 'Authentication' and lists all key actions. However, it could be slightly better structured with a colon and list format.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, the description should provide more context about return values and side effects. For example, it does not indicate that login and reauth involve browser interaction, which is critical for an agent to understand. The description is insufficient for a complete understanding.

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 covers 100% of the single parameter with detailed enum descriptions, so the description adds minimal extra meaning. It essentially restates the enum values, meeting the baseline but not exceeding 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 clearly states it handles authentication tasks and lists specific actions (status, login, logout, reauth, test), distinguishing it from sibling tools that focus on other domains (e.g., issues, projects). However, it is terse and could use a more explicit verb-resource phrase like 'Manage authentication state'.

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 implicitly tells the agent to use this tool for authentication-related operations, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or conditions for using specific actions.

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