Akakçe login

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it names the persisted artifact (session cookie file path), the credential source fallback (AKAKCE_EMAIL/AKAKCE_PASSWORD), and session validity. It doesn't cover failure behavior (bad credentials) or whether an existing session is overwritten, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the action and its side effect, then the dependency unlock, then credential sourcing, then session lifetime. Nothing is redundant enough to cut.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description explains persistence and lifetime but not what the call returns on success (e.g., account identity or a confirmation), which an agent might want. Otherwise complete for a two-optional-param auth tool.

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% and both parameter descriptions already state the env-var fallback, so the description's credential-fallback sentence largely repeats structured data. Baseline 3 applies since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Akakçe hesabına giriş yapar') and discloses the concrete side effect (AAATLGST cookie saved to ~/.config/akakce-mcp/session.json). This clearly separates it from the sibling akakce_logout and from the read-only browsing tools.

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?

Says login unlocks favorites, price alerts and notification tools, which gives the agent the prerequisite condition for those siblings, and notes the ~1-year session lifetime so repeat logins are unnecessary. It stops short of an explicit 'call this if an auth-required tool fails' routing statement.

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