login_sites

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose one valuable trait: credential values are never returned, which is important for a credentials-adjacent tool. However, it does not state that the operation is read-only, whether the list is complete or paginated, or how mode auto/manual is determined.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with what the tool returns and closed with the security-relevant constraint. No filler.

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 zero-param, no-output-schema tool, the description covers the returned fields at a high level, but leaves the meaning of auto vs manual mode, list completeness/ordering, and the intended call sequence unexplained. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain; the baseline for 0-param tools applies. The description does not waste effort restating inputs.

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 fragment "Sites with a login recipe" conveys the resource and the returned fields (mode, credential existence), but there is no verb (list/read) and no differentiation from siblings like atlas_site or browser_login. An agent can infer it enumerates login-capable sites, but the purpose is only implied rather than stated.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus browser_login (perform a login) or atlas_site (site details), and no prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned. The agent must guess that this is a discovery/enumeration step before logging in.

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