Open Jobinja login window

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint=false), it discloses that the user supplies credentials themselves — no credential passing by the agent — and that the call blocks for up to 10 minutes. What is missing is what happens at timeout (failure vs. pending) and whether the tool can be re-invoked safely given idempotentHint=false.

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 waste, with the purpose front-loaded and the trigger condition following. The parenthetical timeout detail earns its place.

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?

With no parameters, no output schema, and annotations covering the safety profile, the description covers nearly everything an agent needs. The remaining gap is post-call behavior — what a returned result or timeout means for retry — which matters because the call is interactive and non-idempotent.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. The description's mention of the 10-minute wait is useful context about invocation behavior rather than parameters.

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?

States a concrete verb and resource — opening a browser window on the user's screen for signing in to the Jobinja employer panel — which no sibling tool does. It also names the related status tool, so an agent can place it in the workflow immediately.

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?

Gives explicit trigger conditions: 'first use, or when jobinja_status reports the session expired', naming the sibling whose output selects this tool. Nothing about when to call it is left to inference.

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