UserAuthLoginTeacher

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

The description adds meaningful security context beyond the annotations by warning that the token is sensitive, must never be logged or cached, and should only be returned in the direct successful tool result. This is valuable behavioral disclosure, though side effects like session creation are not mentioned.

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 compact and front-loaded: the core purpose is stated in the first sentence, followed by a crucial warning. Every sentence earns its place, with no redundant filler.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the security caveats are strong, but the bodyTeacherId parameter remains unexplained and there is no guidance about expected token format, expiry, or failure behavior. The description is adequate but has clear 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?

There is one parameter, bodyTeacherId, with 0% schema description coverage, and the description does not explain its meaning, format, or why it is optional. The tool name and context imply it is the teacher ID, but the description itself adds no parameter-level semantics.

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 action ('Authenticate a teacher') and the outcome ('return a login token'), using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling UserAuthLoginPupil without needing to open the schema.

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 teacher vs. pupil distinction is implied by the tool name and description, but the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus UserAuthLoginPupil or UserAuthCheckAuthToken. There is no when-not-to-use guidance.

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