login

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

The description discloses important behavioral traits beyond the openWorldHint annotation: it requires private elicitation and forbids token exposure in chat. It does not detail side effects or post-login behavior, but for a zero-parameter auth tool this is meaningful added context.

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?

Three short sentences with no redundant content. The purpose is front-loaded, and the sensitive handling instructions earn their place because they are critical for safe invocation.

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 login tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description provides the essential invocation context: what credential to use and how to collect it safely. It could mention success/failure signaling, but the low complexity makes the description largely complete.

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?

There are no schema parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 4. The description clarifies that the actual credential is a personal login token and must not be shared in chat, which adds meaning beyond the empty schema.

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 (Sign in) and a specific resource (Jottacloud personal login token). It clearly distinguishes login from the sibling file-access tools, so an agent can tell this is the authentication step rather than a data operation.

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 gives clear interaction guidance (prompt privately, do not paste token into chat), but it never explicitly states when to use this tool versus alternatives or that it should precede file operations. Usage context is implied by the login purpose, not stated.

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