login

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses key behaviors: opening a browser, using PKCE flow, saving to a config file. It lacks details on whether it overwrites existing credentials or if it blocks, but is otherwise transparent for a login action.

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?

A single, well-structured sentence with no superfluous words. Every part adds value, front-loading the action and its result.

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 optional parameter, no output schema, no nested objects), the description is complete. It explains the core functionality and the parameter adequately.

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 sole parameter 'force' is well-described in the schema, and the tool description adds context by explaining when it is used ('when the current credential comes from the local config file'). Schema coverage is 100%, and the description enriches understanding.

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 verb 'Authenticate', the resource 'RunAPI', and the method 'PKCE login flow', specifying the output saved to a config file. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like text_to_image and get_task.

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 implies this tool is for authentication before using other tools, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites like browser availability or when a re-login is needed beyond the 'force' parameter.

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