login

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses opening a browser and saving a config file, but does not mention potential side effects (e.g., overwriting existing config, requiring user interaction) or error conditions (e.g., browser not available).

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 efficiently conveys all necessary information. It is front-loaded and contains 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?

Given the tool has one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It explains the authentication mechanism and output location. Could mention that the return value is not specified, but since no output schema exists, it is not strictly required.

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 schema description for 'force' is already clear. The tool description adds no additional context beyond what the schema provides. Since schema coverage is 100%, a 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 tool authenticates RunAPI via a PKCE login flow and saves the API key to a config file. It is specific about the verb (authenticate) and resource (RunAPI), and distinguishes itself from siblings which are music generation tools.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use or not use this tool. However, the sibling tools are all music-related, so it's implied this is the sole authentication tool. Does not mention prerequisites or scenarios where login is unnecessary.

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