statelydb-attempt-login

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the single externally visible effect: it returns an authorization URL after starting a login process. It omits whether a server-side session or pending-auth state is created, how long the URL/state remains valid, and whether any credentials or config must already exist.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that states the action and its result with no filler. It is close to minimal, though one clause on the follow-up verification step would have earned its space.

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 simple zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers what the call does and what it produces, which is nearly enough. It stops short of the flow context an agent needs, namely that statelydb-verify-login must follow and that the returned URL is meant to be presented to the user.

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 tool takes no parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline for a zero-parameter tool applies. No misleading parameter information is present.

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 names a specific verb ('Initiate') and resource ('StatelyDB login process') and states the immediate outcome ('authorization URL'), so an agent knows exactly what the call produces. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling statelydb-verify-login, which is the obvious next step in the same flow.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this versus statelydb-verify-login, no prerequisites, and no indication that this is the first step of a two-call login flow. The sequencing must be inferred entirely from the tool names.

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