web_loginObtain a Nexus Mods session by extracting browser cookies or opening a sign-in window. The session persists, so re-run your action after signing in.
Get a nexusmods.com session: extracts cookies from installed browsers, else opens a visible sign-in window (session captured automatically, persists across runs). Re-run your action after signing in.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations indicate non-read-only, open-world, idempotent, non-destructive behavior mustard, and the description adds meaningful context: cookie extraction, visible sign-in fallback, automatic session capture, and persistence across runs. This goes beyond what the annotations alone provide and matches them without contradiction.
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 compact sentences that front-load the purpose, then explain the mechanism and the required post-sign-in action. Every sentence earns its place without redundancy or fluff.
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 zero-parameter login helper, the description covers the workflow, fallback behavior, persistence, and next-step instruction. It does not explicitly state what the session object looks like or how to pass it, but that is not critical given the 'captured automatically' phrasing and the tool's integration-oriented purpose.
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?
There are zero parameters and schema description coverage is 100%, so there is no parameter semantic gap for the description to fill. The baseline of 4 applies because no parameter documentation is needed.
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 identifies the operation as 'Get a nexusmods.com session' and explains the method: extract cookies from installed browsers, otherwise open a visible sign-in window. This distinguishes it from session-related siblings like web_status and web_set_cookies by focusing on obtaining a session rather than checking or setting it.
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 when to use it: before acting on a nexusmods.com session, with the instruction to re-run the action after signing in. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select it for session bootstrap.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.