login_poll

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and 'poll' is all it discloses. It says nothing about terminal states, whether the call blocks, session expiry, or rate limits — the agent must guess when to give up polling. The presence of an output schema excuses it from describing return fields, but not from describing the polling contract.

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?

One short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with zero filler. The terseness is efficient but borders on under-specification rather than true completeness.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be spelled out, and the description correctly identifies the session origin. However, for a polling tool the missing stop condition and cadence are material gaps that leave the agent to infer the loop behavior.

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 0% for the single session_id parameter, so the description must compensate; it does so only implicitly by tying the session to login_start. The name is largely self-explanatory, but the description adds no format, source, or validity details for the value.

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?

States a specific verb ('Poll') plus resource ('a login session') and anchors it to the sibling that creates that session ('started by login_start'), so an agent can distinguish it from login_start. It stops short of saying what polling yields (status/credentials/completion), which keeps it from a 5.

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 phrase 'started by login_start' implies the call order: start first, then poll. There is no guidance on how often to poll, when to stop, or what to do with siblings like login_submit, so usage is implied rather than specified.

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