login

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It mentions the browser login flow and file saving, but omits details like side effects (e.g., overwriting existing config), error handling, or that it requires user interaction. This leaves ambiguity for an AI agent.

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?

One sentence with no wasted words. It starts with the verb 'Authenticate' and efficiently conveys the core action and destination. Ideal conciseness for a simple tool.

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 (1 optional parameter, no output schema), the description covers the essential flow and output location. Minor missing context: it doesn't state that this is a setup step or that it requires a browser, but overall adequate for the complexity.

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 100% (one parameter fully described). The tool description does not add meaning beyond the schema; the force parameter is explained in the schema itself. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the description adds no extra semantic value.

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 action: authenticate via browser PKCE login flow and save the API key to a specific config file. It uniquely identifies the tool's purpose and distinguishes it from unrelated sibling tools like check_pricing or text_to_image.

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 when to use (to authenticate), but does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives. The force parameter hint is in the schema, not the description. No exclusions or context about prerequisites.

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