auth_login

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavior disclosure. It adds meaningful context beyond the schema: 'Password is used once, never stored' and 'full-scope session token.' It does not explain token expiry or whether existing sessions are invalidated, but the provided security-related detail is valuable.

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 tight sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the second sentence adds a critical security detail. Every word 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?

This is a simple auth tool with no output schema and no annotations, so the description should cover what the agent needs to call it correctly. It explains the purpose and password handling, but leaves out what the response looks like and what the otp parameter means. Those are important gaps for an agent deciding whether to pass OTP or expecting a token in the result.

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 description explicitly names user_id and password)Skip, adding semantic meaning beyond the raw schema. It also notes the password's single-use behavior. However, the optional otp parameter is not mentioned at all, and schema description coverage is 0%, so the description does not fully compensate.

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 states a specific action: 'Validate user_id+password against Seafile and issue a full-scope session token.' This clearly identifies the tool as the initial login operation and distinguishes it from siblings like auth_reauth, auth_rotate, and auth_revoke.

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 implies this is for first-time authentication by saying it validates credentials and issues a session token McDonald. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over auth_reauth or auth_rotate, nor does it mention alternatives.

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