chipotle_login

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes the authentication behavior but does not disclose side effects (e.g., session creation, token handling) or failure behavior. For a standard login tool, this is adequate but lacks depth.

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 two sentences, front-loads the purpose, and contains no superfluous words. Every sentence 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?

Given the tool's simple nature (login), no output schema, and full schema coverage, the description adequately covers what the tool does and its role in the workflow. It is complete for the expected use case.

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 both parameters ('email' and 'password'). The tool description only restates these parameters without adding extra meaning (e.g., format requirements, constraints). Baseline score 3 is appropriate as schema already provides sufficient information.

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 function: 'Authenticate with your Chipotle account using email and password.' It also explains the importance ('Required to access rewards and saved payment methods'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like chipotle_get_rewards or chipotle_checkout.

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 provides clear context by stating it is required for accessing rewards and payment methods, implying when to use it. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives (e.g., if already logged in, use chipotle_logout first), but the context is sufficiently clear.

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