login

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

The description discloses key behaviors: opens a browser, uses PKCE flow, saves API key to config file. It also explains the force parameter behavior. However, it does not mention potential side effects like overwriting existing config or prerequisites like browser availability.

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, complete sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and method without extra 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?

Given the tool's low complexity (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description is adequately complete. It explains the authentication flow and where the key is saved. Minor omission: no mention of prerequisites or return behavior.

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% with the 'force' parameter already well-described in the schema. The tool description does not add additional semantics beyond what the schema provides, 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 the verb 'Authenticate', the resource 'RunAPI', and the method 'PKCE login flow', distinguishing it from sibling tools like check_pricing or text_to_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 for authentication but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives, nor when not to use it. The 'force' parameter provides some context but no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over others.

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