Log into maintenance mode

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

Annotations already disclose readOnly=false, idempotent=false, openWorld=true, and destructive=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that authentication can be by maintenance token or cookie and that it unlocks further maintenance actions, but it does not detail session lifetime, admin requirement, or rate limits.

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 short and front-loads the action, then adds a one-sentence usage note and an endpoint identifier. The repeated title and operation metadata are compact enough not to detract.

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 one-parameter login tool with annotations and no output schema, the description is usable but incomplete: it omits what 'current information' is returned, whether admin privileges are required, and what the login produces for subsequent calls. The sibling set includes set_maintenance_mode, so more routing context would help.

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 the single token parameter is described as 'token (request body)'. The description adds that this is a maintenance token and can alternatively be a cookie, but offers no format or source guidance 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 names a specific action ('Log into maintenance mode') and resource ('maintenance mode'), and the mention of 'maintenance token' distinguishes it from the generic immich_login sibling. An agent can identify it as the admin maintenance authentication endpoint without opening the schema.

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?

It says the login is to 'receive current information and perform further actions', which implies when to use it, but it does not explicitly compare it to immich_login, immich_set_maintenance_mode, or immich_get_maintenance_status. No when-not-to-use or alternative routing is provided.

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