login

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

Without annotations, the description clearly discloses the tool's behavior: checking status, opening browser, waiting for scan, saving cookies. It accurately describes the login process without contradictions.

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 extremely concise: two sentences for behavior and one line for args. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is clear with a heading-like 'Args:' section.

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?

Although there is an output schema, the description does not mention return values. However, for a login tool, the behavior is sufficiently described. It could be slightly more complete by stating what the function returns (e.g., success status).

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 description explains the only parameter (timeout_seconds) with its purpose and default, adding value beyond the schema which only provides type and default. Schema coverage is 0%, so the description compensates well.

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: checking login status and initiating login if needed. It mentions opening a browser for QR scanning and auto-saving cookies, which is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools that handle other tasks.

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 implies usage before other tools that require authentication, but it does not explicitly state 'use this first' or provide when-not-to-use conditions. The single mention of a default timeout offers basic guidance.

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