Start Local Device Login

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It explicitly discloses 'Development only' and that the result is cached locally, which are important behavioral traits. It does not detail the interactive device-code prompt or local cache format, but it provides meaningful transparency beyond a vague verb.

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 brief and front-loaded: a development-only warning, the core action, and the caching result. The Chinese intent list adds value for multilingual intent matching without unnecessary filler.

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 low-complexity tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is largely complete: it states the purpose, context, and side effect. It omits the next step (e.g., use auth_complete_device_login) and what the tool returns, but the sibling list and title make this inferable.

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 schema covers 100% of parameters and already describes the optional scopes override and its default. The description adds no extra parameter semantics, but the baseline of 3 applies because the schema does the heavy lifting sufficiently.

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?

Description clearly states a specific action: 'Start a 21V Entra device-code login and cache the result locally.' It names the resource (Entra device-code login), the verb (start), and the side effect (cache locally). This differentiates it from sibling tools like auth_complete_device_login and auth_status.

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 gives clear context with 'Development only' and implies when to use the tool (when initiating a local device-code login). However, it does not explicitly contrast with or point to related tools, such as auth_complete_device_login for finishing the flow, nor does it state when not to use this tool.

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