zhihu_login

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that login state is stored locally, not returned via MCP, and that graphical interface is required. It also mentions a workaround for short timeouts. It could add behavior on successful/failed scans, but the disclosed information is substantial.

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 plus a note, front-loaded with the main action. Every sentence adds operational value, making it efficient and well-structured.

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, no-output tool, the description covers prerequisites, side effects, and a fallback option. It lacks explicit success/failure behavior but is otherwise adequate for an AI agent to select and invoke the tool.

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 has zero parameters, and the schema covers 100% (vacuously). The baseline score of 4 applies, and the description adds context about what the tool returns (nothing), which is helpful.

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 function: opening a browser window for QR-code login to Zhihu. It uses specific verbs and resources, and the context about local storage distinguishes it from related tools like zhihu_check_login.

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?

It provides clear operational context: requires a GUI and warns about timeout issues, suggesting a terminal alternative (`npm run login`). It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like zhihu_check_login, but the usage context is clear.

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