kit_auth_login

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses that the tool stores a token and requires specific scopes, but does not mention whether it overwrites existing tokens, how persistent the storage is, or any side effects. The description adds some value beyond the schema but lacks depth.

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 consists of two concise sentences that immediately state the tool's purpose and provide essential scope information. Every sentence adds value, and there is no wasted text.

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 a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema or annotations, the description covers the key aspects: what it does, which tools use it, and token scope requirements. It might be improved by mentioning whether the token is stored permanently or per-session, but overall it is sufficient for an agent to understand usage.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with one parameter described as 'A GitHub personal access token'. The description adds the scope requirement, which is not present in the schema, enhancing the parameter's meaning. This additional context helps the agent select and use the parameter correctly.

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 stores a GitHub personal access token for specific tools (kit_check_pr_status, kit_revalidate_pr). The verb 'Store' and resource 'GitHub personal access token' are specific, and it distinguishes from siblings like dev_auth_login by specifying its use for kit tools.

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 provides context on when to use the token (for kit_check_pr_status and kit_revalidate_pr) and specifies required scopes (public_repo or repo). It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives like dev_auth_login, but the context is clear.

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