GoLogin MCP

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but fails to do so. It does not indicate whether this is a read or write operation, what side effects occur (e.g., starting a cloud session, consuming resources), or any constraints like rate limits or authentication needs. The verb 'run' implies an action but lacks detail on outcomes or risks.

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 concise with a single sentence, but it is under-specified rather than efficiently informative. While it avoids unnecessary words, it fails to provide essential details, making it more of a placeholder than a helpful summary.

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 the complexity implied by 'run' in a cloud context, no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage for the parameter, the description is severely incomplete. It does not cover what the tool does, how to use it, what it returns, or any behavioral aspects, making it inadequate for effective tool selection and invocation.

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 1 parameter with 0% description coverage, and the tool description adds no information about the 'id' parameter. It does not explain what the ID refers to (e.g., a profile identifier), its format, or how to obtain it, leaving the parameter's meaning and usage completely undocumented.

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 'Run profile in the cloud' is vague and tautological—it essentially restates the tool name 'post_profile__id__web' without specifying what 'run' means in this context (e.g., execute, launch, or activate a profile). It does not distinguish this tool from siblings like 'post_profile_quick' or 'post_profile_custom', which likely involve similar actions on profiles.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks context about prerequisites, such as whether the profile must exist or be in a specific state, and does not mention any sibling tools as alternatives or complementary actions.

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