pospal_login

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

The description discloses that the tool forces re-login and refreshes session cookie, indicating a destructive action on the current session. However, it does not elaborate on side effects (e.g., invalidating existing tokens, requiring credentials) or behavior on failure. With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden but provides only basic information.

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?

A single, concise sentence that immediately communicates the tool's action and purpose. No superfluous information.

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 tool has no parameters, the description is largely complete. An output schema exists (not shown) so return value explanation is not required. However, the description could mention what the output (e.g., success status, new session token) indicates, but this is partially covered by the output schema.

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 tool accepts zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter meaning. Per guidelines, baseline for 0 params is 4. No additional param info is required.

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 explicitly states the action (强制重新登录, force re-login) and the target resource (银豹云后台, Yinyao cloud backend; 刷新会话 cookie, refresh session cookie). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like pospal_openapi_status and pospal_session_info by focusing on re-authentication.

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 usage for refreshing session cookies, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., pospal_openapi_status for checking session validity). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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