Opens a browser window for SJTU cloud drive login via jAccount QR code or credentials, then saves the login session. Blocks until the user finishes logging in.
弹出浏览器窗口登录交大云盘（jAccount 扫码/账号密码），登录成功后自动保存登录态。调用后会阻塞等待用户完成登录
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| timeout | No | 等待登录的超时秒数（默认 240） |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description discloses key behaviors: it pops up a browser window, blocks until the user completes login, and automatically saves the login state. Since no annotations are provided, this description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. However, it does not mention what happens on timeout or failure, which is a minor gap.
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 and front-loaded: it states the primary action first, then the blocking behavior and state saving. It is a single sentence with no redundant information, efficiently conveying the essential facts.
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?
The description covers the core behavior and parameter, but it does not explicitly state that this tool should be invoked before other pan_* operations to establish authentication. It also does not mention what happens after successful login (e.g., return values), but since there is no output schema, that is acceptable. The missing prerequisite guidance is a notable gap for an agent deciding tool order.
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 only parameter, timeout, is fully described in the input schema (default 240 seconds). The tool description does not add any additional information about the parameter beyond what the schema already provides. With schema coverage at 100%, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.
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: it opens a browser window to log in to the SJTU cloud drive via jAccount (QR code or account/password) and saves the login state. It uses a specific verb ('登录') and names the resource ('交大云盘'), making it distinguishable from sibling tools like pan_download_dir or pan_list_dir.
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 explains what the tool does but does not explicitly state when to use it relative to the sibling tools. It does not mention that this is a prerequisite for other pan_* operations, nor does it discuss any alternatives or conditions where this tool should or should not be used. The context is implied but not stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.