kite_login

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

Annotations are all false (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint), but the description adds value by revealing side effects like auto-generating TOTP and logging in. It does not disclose failure behaviors or session lifespan, but with minimal annotation help, this is adequate.

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 concise sentences with no fluff. The key action is front-loaded ('Authenticate with Zerodha Kite'). Every sentence is essential.

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 the tool is an authenticator with zero parameters and a clear use case (auth errors), the description covers the main points. It could mention that it should be called once at session start, but with the output schema existing (not needing return value clarification), it's nearly complete.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters and 100% coverage (no undocumented params). The description adds 'auto-generates TOTP' which is not a parameter detail but behavioral. Baseline for high schema coverage is 3, and description doesn't add parameter-specific meaning.

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 authenticates with Zerodha Kite, using specific verbs like 'Authenticate' and 'logs in'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools (e.g., trade/order tools) by being an auth tool. No ambiguity.

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?

Explicitly says 'Call this if other tools fail with auth errors', providing a clear use case. However, it doesn't mention when not to use it (e.g., if already authenticated) or any prerequisites, leaving slight room for improvement.

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