wilma_loginOpens a browser login page to connect a Wilma account or add another account for a child, so passwords are entered on the school site, not in chat.
Open a login page in the user's browser to connect a Wilma account, or add another one (for a child at a school with a different Wilma). The password is entered on that page, never in the chat.
| 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?
The annotations already indicate non-destructive, idempotent behavior and that this is not read-only. The description adds important behavioral context by explaining that it opens a browser-based login page and that the password is entered only on that page, never in chat. It does not detail post-login session behavior, but the key security and interaction traits are disclosed.
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?
Two sentences with no wasted language, front-loaded with the action and scope. The parenthetical about adding a child's account is useful and concise.
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?
Given zero parameters, no output schema, and annotations covering the safety profile, the description provides enough context for correct invocation. It explains the browser-based login flow, multi-account use, and password-handling constraint.
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, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The schema is empty and fully covered; the baseline for a zero-parameter tool is a 4.
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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Open a login page' for connecting a Wilma account. It also explains the multi-account case for a child at a different school, distinguishing it from data-retrieval siblings like wilma_gradebook and from wilma_logout.
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 states the trigger conditions clearly: connect a Wilma account or add another one for a child at a different school. It also warns that the password must be entered on the login page, not in chat. There is no explicit when-not guidance, but there is no meaningful sibling alternative to redirect to.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.