update_credentials

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Update session cookies' implies a mutation operation that modifies authentication state, but it doesn't describe what happens to existing cookies, whether this affects current sessions, or any security implications. The 'manually' qualifier adds some context but insufficient for a mutation 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 a single, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple tool and front-loads the essential information.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what happens after updating cookies, whether the operation is reversible, what errors might occur, or how to verify success. The sibling tools appear unrelated, but this doesn't compensate for the missing behavioral context.

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 description coverage is 50% (only 'cookies' has a description). The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema. It doesn't explain what format the cookie string should be in, what CSRF tokens are used for, or relationships between parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate given partial schema coverage.

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 ('Update') and the resource ('session cookies'), and specifies 'manually' which adds useful context about the operation mode. It doesn't differentiate from sibling tools, but those appear unrelated to credential management, so this is adequate.

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 or prerequisites. It mentions 'manually' which hints at a specific use case but doesn't explain when manual updates are needed versus automated ones or what triggers this operation.

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