linkedin_auth_reload

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

Annotations indicate this is a non-read-only, non-idempotent operation. The description adds useful behavioral context: it reloads cookies from a file/env source, re-validates the session, and serves as an alternative to server restart. It does not fully disclose failure modes, but the annotations cover the basic safety profile.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and every sentence contributes value: first defines what it does, second specifies the recommended usage scenario. No wasted words.

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 moderate complexity, the description adequately covers purpose, usage context, and the role of parameters. It lacks explicit mention of return values or failure behavior, but no output schema exists and the annotations provide safety context.

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 coverage is 100% with well-described parameters. The description does not add additional parameter details beyond what the schema already provides, so 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 uses a specific verb+resource ('Reload cookies') and clearly states the action of re-validating the session. It distinguishes from sibling auth tools by referencing the 'configured source (file or environment)' and the recovery-from-expired-session use case.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use this after the user has exported a fresh cookie file to recover from an expired session without restarting the server.' It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the context of sibling tools like import_cookies is implied by the phrase 'configured source'.

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