stremio_login

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and largely meets it: it discloses that the auth key survives for this server's lifetime and, with remember, is cached in the user state directory for persistence across runs. It does not state failure behavior (invalid credentials, rate limits, whether the password itself is discarded), which is the main remaining gap for a login tool.

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?

Front-loads the core action in one short sentence, then spends two more on persistence and the third-party-account restriction. Every sentence is load-bearing, though the line break placement is a bit arbitrary and the persistence detail could be tightened.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the description covers the two things an agent actually needs: credential requirements and session persistence semantics. What is missing is error/edge-case behavior and whether prior login state makes this call unnecessary.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. Email and password are self-evident, but the description usefully explains what remember actually does — caching the key to the user state directory so later runs stay signed in — which is more than the bare boolean default the schema provides. The slight tension between 'with remember' and a default of true is not clarified.

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?

States a specific verb (sign in) and resource (Stremio account) with the exact credential inputs. It is trivially distinguishable from the sibling stremio_logout and from stremio_account_status, which reads state rather than establishing a session.

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?

Gives an explicit when-not: accounts created through Facebook or Google cannot use this, and points to the STREMIO_AUTH_KEY alternative for those cases. It does not cross-reference the sibling stremio_logout or clarify whether login is required before other stremio_* calls, so it falls short of full when/when-not/alternatives guidance.

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