login

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the tool's behavior (opens a browser), the trigger condition, and the fact that it's not normally required. It could mention whether it returns anything or blocks, but given the simplicity of the action, it is sufficiently transparent.

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?

Two sentences with no fluff. The action is stated first, followed by the condition and the normal alternative. Every word adds value.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers what the agent needs to know: what it does, when to call it, and when it's unnecessary. Nothing is missing for correct invocation.

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 has zero parameters, so the schema is trivially complete. The description adds no parameter semantics because none exist; the baseline of 4 for zero-parameter tools 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 action ('Open browser for Webget Google login') and the resource ('Webget Google login'), distinguishing it from sibling database tools. It also mentions the specific condition under which it's needed, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly states when to use ('Only needed if calls fail with auth errors') and when not to use ('normally the first API call auto-triggers this'), providing clear guidance and an alternative path. This is excellent usage direction.

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