login_complete

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses that the tool polls automatically, waits for user interaction, and saves a token (a side effect). However, it does not mention potential timeout or failure behavior, a minor gap.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and includes both the functional behavior and the timing instruction without any filler. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a simple, parameterless login-completion step, the description fully explains what happens (waits, polls, saves token) and when to call it (immediately after login_start). Since there is no output schema, no return details are required. The description is complete for this operational context.

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. Per the rubric, baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description adds no parameter information because none is needed.

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: it waits for user approval of the PostKing login code and saves the token. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling `login_start` by indicating it is the subsequent step in the login flow.

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 phrase 'call this immediately after `login_start`' provides an explicit when-to-use instruction, telling the agent the correct sequencing. This is especially valuable for a two-step login process where timing is critical.

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