seerr_login_local

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=false, and the description adds 'WRITE: this modifies your Seerr instance,' which explicitly discloses that the operation changes server state. This is useful but shallow; it does not elaborate on session handling, credential requirements, or rate limits, so it adds only modest context beyond the annotations.

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 compact and front-loaded: one sentence for purpose and a brief side-effect warning. No redundant words or excessive detail, making it quick to parse while still conveying the essential action and an important caveat.

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 operation with an undocumented body parameter, the description is too sparse. It lacks prerequisites (e.g., existing local account), credential expectations, and any indication of the response format. The output schema may cover returns, but the input side is severely underexplained, making the tool risky to invoke.

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 only a 'body' object with additionalProperties=true and no descriptions (0% schema coverage). The description never mentions this parameter, leaving the agent without hints about what fields (e.g., username, password) are needed. The description completely fails to compensate for the opaque schema.

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 action ('Sign in') and the resource ('local account'), distinguishing it from sibling login tools like seerr_login_plex and seerr_login_jellyfin. The 'WRITE:' note reinforces the state-changing nature without obscuring the primary purpose.

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 phrase 'using a local account' implies the tool is for local credential login, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives (e.g., Plex, Jellyfin) or specify when not to use it. Guidance is only implicit through the sibling tool names in the list, not from the description itself.

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