mmar_login

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool must be called first and that it returns a confirmation of an active session. While it does not detail error handling or session duration, it provides essential behavioral context for a login operation.

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 exactly two sentences, with the purpose and the key constraint (MUST be called first) front-loaded. No redundant or irrelevant information is present, making it extremely concise and well-structured.

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 login tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains the return value ('confirmation that the session is active') and the ordering requirement. Given the low complexity of the tool, this is complete enough for an agent to use it correctly.

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%, and both parameters have descriptive text with examples ('e.g., admin'). The description adds nothing beyond the schema, but the schema already fully documents the parameters, so a baseline 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 'Log in to the MM-AR metamodeling platform' with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes from siblings by explicitly stating it is the mandatory first step, setting it apart from all other 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 gives explicit usage guidance: 'This MUST be called first before using any other MM-AR tools.' This clearly indicates when to use the tool and the prerequisite ordering, leaving no ambiguity about its role.

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