Verificar sesión de Fansly

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that the tool checks two specific locations (browser_data/ and FANSLY_TOKEN) and reports authentication status, which is relevant behavioral context. It does not mention side effects or network calls, but for a simple verification tool, the core behavior is adequately 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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that states the verb and the object immediately. Every word contributes to conveying the tool's purpose and behavior, with no redundant or filler content.

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's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema, sibling tools are all analytics), the description is complete. It explains what is checked, where the token may reside, and that the output is the authentication status, which fully covers the expected functionality.

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 input schema has zero parameters, giving a baseline of 4. The description adds meaning beyond the empty schema by specifying exactly what is checked (browser_data/ directory or FANSLY_TOKEN environment variable), providing semantic context that would otherwise be completely absent.

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 with the specific verb 'Comprueba' (checks) and identifies the resource: session token existence in browser_data/ or FANSLY_TOKEN, then reports the authentication status. This distinguishes it from the sibling analytics tools, which focus on metrics and reports.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool or mention alternatives, but the purpose of checking a session token implies it should be used as a prerequisite before performing other operations, such as the analytics tools listed as siblings. Usage is implied rather than directly stated.

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