login

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the interactive browser flow, PKCE method, and the side effect of saving the API key to a specific file path. This provides good transparency for a login tool.

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 a single sentence that front-loads the key action ('Authenticate RunAPI') and efficiently conveys the method and output. No wasted words.

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 login tool with one boolean parameter and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and side effect (file write). Minor gaps remain, such as behavior when already authenticated or if browser is unavailable, but overall 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% for the lone 'force' parameter, and the tool description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 specific action: opening a browser PKCE login flow and saving the API key. This distinguishes it from sibling tools which are unrelated (image/video generation and pricing).

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 is the initial authentication tool but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., if another authentication method exists). No guidance on when to use the 'force' parameter beyond its schema description.

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