atlassian_login

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description fully discloses behavior. It explains that the tool does not perform login but reports instructions, and details why synchronous Playwright login would cause issues. It also states the outcome: the saved cookie jar is reused automatically.

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 concise yet comprehensive. Every sentence adds value: the main purpose is stated first, followed by technical rationale and a clear CLI command. No extraneous information or 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 tool's simplicity (login guide with two optional params and an output schema), the description covers all essential context: why it exists, how authentication works, and what the agent should do. The output schema exists, so explaining return values is not required.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the 'target' parameter indirectly by mentioning Jira and Confluence, but the 'url' parameter is completely unexplained. This omission leaves uncertainty about its purpose and usage.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Report how to authenticate.' It distinguishes itself from all sibling tools, which are operational Jira/Confluence actions, by focusing on authentication guidance. The verb 'report' is specific to providing instructions rather than performing actions.

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 explicitly explains when to use this tool (when authentication is needed) and when not to use it (avoiding Playwright in-process due to deadlock). It provides a concrete alternative: running the CLI command 'atlassian-cli login <jira|confluence>'. This clearly guides the agent on how to proceed.

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