login

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It discloses key behaviors: opens a browser, uses PKCE, saves to a config file. However, it omits details like error handling or whether it checks existing credentials.

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 with no unnecessary words. It is concise and front-loaded with the action and resource.

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 is a simple login with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential action and side effect. It could mention return value or behavior on already authenticated state, but overall it is sufficient.

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 single parameter 'force', and the schema already describes its meaning. The description adds no further parameter context, so baseline score of 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 'Authenticate RunAPI by opening a browser PKCE login flow and saving the API key' which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes the login tool from unrelated sibling tools like check_pricing or extend_video.

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 usage (need to authenticate) but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or exceptions like already being logged in. The 'force' parameter is described in the schema but not in the description.

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