Albert Heijn: Log In

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

With annotations only declaring readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, the description carries the real behavioral burden and does so well: codes are single-use, expire quickly, and an already-authenticated session returns the account name. It doesn't mention session lifetime, token storage, or what happens on an expired/invalid code, which keeps it short of 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?

Two numbered steps plus two short trailing sentences; the flow is front-loaded and every sentence (expiry, already-logged-in behavior) carries distinct, actionable information.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must describe returns, and it does: a login link plus instructions on the first call and the account name when already logged in. For a one-optional-parameter auth tool this is complete.

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 description coverage is 100% and the single `code` parameter is fully documented there, so baseline is 3. The description restates that the full link or just the code is accepted and that omitting it starts a login, adding no semantics 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Log in to Albert Heijn') and immediately distinguishes itself from siblings by describing the two-step flow unique to this tool. An agent can tell it apart from ah_logout and the shopping-list tools without opening a 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?

Explicitly says when to call with no arguments (to start) and when to call with `code` (to finish after the user logs in), including the exact redirect shape to look for. It also covers the already-logged-in case, leaving nothing to inference.

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