Guardar credenciales de SIIGO

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

The description adds a valuable security guarantee that the password is never returned in any response, which goes beyond the minimal annotations. It also clarifies the scoping behavior for default vs. company-specific credentials. However, it does not mention whether existing credentials are overwritten.

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 long, front-loaded with the main action, and every sentence provides useful context. There is no redundant or filler content.

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 credential-setting tool, the description covers the core purpose, scoping options, and an important security property. It could mention whether it overwrites existing credentials or returns confirmation, but these are minor omissions for the tool's simplicity.

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 input schema already provides 100% coverage with clear descriptions for all parameters, including the default behavior for 'empresa'. The description mainly rephrases this and adds a convenience note, offering marginal additional meaning beyond the 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 clearly states the tool saves a user and password in the server configuration using a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes between the default and company-specific scenarios, making the tool's behavior clear and distinct from siblings.

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 explains when to omit or include the 'empresa' parameter, providing clear usage context for both default and per-company credential saving. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the tool's unique purpose among siblings makes the usage context clear.

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