liveauth_mcp_start

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It does state the return types and the default PoW challenge, but it omits potential side effects, such as whether starting a new session invalidates existing ones or requires prior authentication. This leaves important behavioral context undisclosed.

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, front-loaded sentence that directly states the action and the possible outcomes. It contains no redundant or filler phrases, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core return types and default behavior. While it could provide more detail about the response structure or next steps, the information given is sufficient to understand the tool's basic operation.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with descriptive definitions for both boolean parameters. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb 'Start' and resource 'LiveAuth MCP session', making the purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by clearly indicating this is the initialization action, and it enumerates the distinct return types (PoW challenge, Lightning invoice, L402 bundle).

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 the entry point for starting a session, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus sibling tools like liveauth_mcp_status or liveauth_mcp_charge. No prerequisites or alternative usage scenarios are provided, so the guidance remains at an implied level.

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