jan3_login_complete

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

With no annotations, the description discloses key behavioral traits: session file saved with restrictive permissions (0o600), token previews only (security measure), and next_step hint. It could mention potential errors but is sufficiently transparent for a login step.

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 three sentences, each adding essential context: role in flow, core action, security behavior, and next step. No unnecessary words, and the most critical info (step number and purpose) comes first.

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's role in a two-step login process with security implications, the description covers purpose, sequencing, file persistence, token handling, and next action. Despite no output schema, the description sufficiently sets expectations.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all parameters. The description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Exchanges the OTP for JWT tokens and saves the session' with specific file path and permissions. It distinguishes itself as 'Step 2' of the captchaless login, differentiating from jan3_login_start and jan3_login.

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 explicitly positions this as the second step of a multi-step process and mentions that the result cues the user to use jan3_enable_lightning_address. However, it does not provide explicit exclusion criteria or compare with jan3_login.

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