create_login_grant

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behaviors: creates a one-time URL, no password required, and returns expiration info. It does not mention potential permissions or whether existing tokens are invalidated, but for a token generator this is reasonably transparent.

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 well-structured with a summary, args, returns, and example. It is mostly concise, though the Args section largely repeats schema information, making it slightly redundant. Still, the front-loaded summary and example add 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 simplicity (one parameter) and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete: it explains the purpose, usage context, parameter, return value, and provides an example. No critical information is missing for correct invocation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It states 'user_id: The user ID to generate a login token for', which clarifies the parameter's role but adds little beyond the parameter name. It lacks context on how to obtain a valid user_id or any constraints, so it only partially compensates.

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 specific action ('Generate an SSO login token') and the resource ('for a user'), with a one-line summary that distinguishes it from sibling user management tools. The verb is specific and the scope is unambiguous.

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 on when to use it ('Useful for embedding reports or creating custom login pages'), but does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives. This is sufficient for a unique tool but lacks explicit exclusions.

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