login

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses the browser PKCE flow, config file path, and force parameter behavior. However, it could mention potential side effects like browser popup or waiting for user input. Still, for a login tool, it is fairly transparent.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. Purpose is clearly stated first, then additional detail on the parameter. Efficient and front-loaded.

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 simplicity (1 parameter, no output schema), the description explains the authentication process and where credentials are stored. It is nearly complete, though missing a note on return value (if any) but output schema is absent.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the description adds no new meaning beyond the schema's parameter description. The baseline is 3, and the description does not enhance understanding of the 'force' parameter.

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's purpose: 'Authenticate RunAPI' with a specific mechanism (PKCE login flow) and outcome (saving API key to config file). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like upscale_image or check_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 usage when authentication is needed, and the force parameter is explained in schema. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or suggest alternatives, but the context is clear enough.

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