login

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: credentials are harvested once, persisted server-side like a session token, and verified with a live request before returning. This is exceptional transparency for a login tool.

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 and well-structured: a short opening sentence stating the purpose, followed by a paragraph explaining the rationale and a bullet-like list for each parameter. Every sentence adds value without unnecessary verbosity.

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 that no annotations are present and schema coverage is 0%, the description does a good job covering the login process. It explains parameter usage, persistence, and verification. However, it does not mention the tool's return value (though an output schema exists) or error scenarios, leaving minor gaps.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description carries full burden. It explains the meaning and source of nyt_s_cookie (NYT-S cookie value) and user_id (regi_id from regi_cookie), and clarifies that user_id is optional and only needed for list_saved_recipes. This adds essential meaning beyond the 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 clearly states the tool's purpose: storing NYT Cooking credentials to keep the server logged in. It distinguishes from siblings like login-related tools by focusing on credential storage and verification, not authentication status or 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?

The description explains how to obtain the parameters (NYT-S cookie and user_id) and notes that user_id is only needed for list_saved_recipes. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like auth_status or logout, though the context implies it is the first step after obtaining cookies.

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