mq_login

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action 'Login' but fails to describe critical traits like authentication requirements (e.g., token validity), session creation, error handling, or rate limits. The mention of server defaults adds minimal context without detailing behavioral implications.

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 concise with two short sentences, avoiding unnecessary verbosity. However, it is front-loaded with the core action but under-specified, making it efficient yet incomplete rather than optimally informative.

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 complexity of a login tool with no annotations or output schema, the description is inadequate. It lacks details on authentication flow, success/failure responses, session state, and integration with sibling tools, leaving significant gaps for agent understanding.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for undocumented parameters. It mentions 'token' and 'server' but provides no semantic details beyond their names, such as token format, server URL expectations, or the effect of defaults. This adds little value over the bare schema.

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 'Login with a token' restates the tool name 'mq_login' in a tautological manner, providing minimal additional insight. It vaguely mentions authentication but lacks specificity about what resource or system is being accessed, failing to distinguish it from sibling tools like 'mq_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?

No explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The mention of 'Server defaults to config' implies a context for server configuration but does not clarify prerequisites, exclusions, or relationships with sibling tools such as 'mq_logout' for session management.

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