login

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full burden. It does add useful context (external site, credential-based session, session-remember flag), but it says nothing about failure behavior, credential handling, or what a persisted session means for later calls.

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 front-loaded sentence with the purpose stated before the parameter synopsis. The parenthetical is slightly redundant with the schema but is compact and not wasteful.

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 four-parameter login tool with no output schema, the description covers destination, intent, and credential/session parameters, which is close to enough. The omission of project_id and of any post-login state behavior is the remaining gap.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters, giving a baseline of 3. The CLI synopsis conveys positional order but also misrepresents 'remember' as 'y|n' while the schema types it boolean, and project_id is never mentioned.

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 (log in) and a concrete target (my.st.com) plus why it matters (firmware/pack downloads). It is clearly distinguishable from the 'logout' sibling by the verb alone, though it never names that sibling.

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?

Implies the trigger condition: log in before downloading firmware or packs. There is no explicit statement of prerequisites, when re-authentication is needed, or that 'logout' is the counterpart operation, so an agent must infer the workflow.

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