Check Jira and Confluence sign-in

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

The annotations already establish that this is read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds substantial behavioral detail: it never opens a browser, never reads the Keychain, changes nothing in Jira or Confluence, and returns specific diagnostic fields including jar age, cookie counts, expiry, live-check result, and next step.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by usage context, behavioral guarantees, and return information. Every sentence contributes useful information without wasteful repetition.

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 simple two-parameter interface, full schema coverage, annotations, and an output schema, the description is complete. It tells the agent what the tool does, when to use it, what it will not do, and what kind of diagnostic output to expect.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the service enum and check_live flag are already fully documented. The description mentions live-check results but does not add parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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 a specific verb and resource: it reports whether saved Jira and Confluence browser sessions exist and work. This is clearly distinct from sibling tools such as atlassian_login because it checks status rather than performing authentication.

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 gives clear usage contexts: before a batch of Atlassian calls or after a 'Not authenticated' error. It does not explicitly name atlassian_login as the follow-up alternative, but it does explain that the result includes the exact command the user needs.

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