lanhu_auth_login

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

With no annotations, the description partially fills the gap by noting the login is 'interactive' (requiring user action via a Chrome Profile), which hints at non-automated behavior. However, it does not disclose critical details: whether the process is blocking, how long it takes, whether it caches sessions, or what state changes occur on the system. The interactive nature is useful but incomplete.

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 sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the action and resource, and every word ('打开专属 Chrome Profile 进行交互式 Lanhu 登录') is meaningful. No fluff or repetition.

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 complexity (login, interactive) and the existence of an output schema (not shown), the description provides minimum viable context. It explains what the tool does but omits details like what 'interactive' entails (e.g., user must confirm in browser), side effects on existing sessions, or post-login behavior. The lack of prerequisites or expected outcomes reduces completeness.

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 and 100% coverage, so the description need not explain parameters. It adds no redundant information. According to guidelines, 0 parameters earns a baseline of 4, which is appropriate as the description is harmlessly silent on parameters.

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 purpose: opening a dedicated Chrome Profile for interactive Lanhu login. It uses a specific verb ('打开') and resource ('Chrome Profile', 'Lanhu登录'), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like lanhu_auth_status and lanhu_auth_logout, which handle session state.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., whether user is already logged in), expected usage order, or when to prefer lanhu_auth_login over other auth tools. The agent is left to infer that login must precede other operations, but this is implicit.

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