hermes_login

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses waiting behavior by default, popup skipping if already signed in, and session cookie capture. This adds meaningful context beyond the bare schema, though error handling details are omitted.

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?

Three sentences with no fluff. The first sentence states core purpose and capture action, the second highlights default behavioral trait, and the third provides usage context. Information is front-loaded and 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?

Given no output schema, the description notes 'returns success so you can proceed'. It covers parameter usage, behavioral expectations, and use cases. While error handling and return format could be more explicit, the description is sufficiently complete for a login tool.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema: it mentions the 'wait' behavior inline but does not elaborate on 'timeoutSeconds'. The schema already documents both parameters adequately.

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 'Open a browser sign-in window for Hermes (SSO) and capture the session cookie', specifying the verb, resource, and action scope. It distinguishes from sibling tools like hermes_check_auth (auth verification) and hermes_sharepoint_login (different SSO).

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?

Explicit guidance is given: 'Call this at the start of a Hermes task if not signed in, or whenever a tool reports an authentication error.' It also mentions automatic skip if already signed in. While it doesn't name alternative tools for checking auth status, the context is clear.

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