covidence_login

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It transparently states that the tool returns navigation instructions rather than performing the login itself, and that the user's password is never passed through the server. This is meaningful behavior beyond the schema, though it could further disclose session persistence or behavior on already-logged-in states.

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 with no filler. The primary action is front-loaded, and the security-relevant detail about the password is included concisely. Every sentence 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?

For a simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description provides enough context: what the tool does, what it returns, and a critical security boundary. An agent can invoke it correctly and understand the expected result.

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%, so the email parameter is already documented. The description adds slight context by implying only the email is needed and that the password is handled externally, but it does not materially expand parameter meaning beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Start a Covidence session') and clearly differentiates this tool from the sibling screening/criteria/navigation tools. It also clarifies the tool's output is step-by-step login instructions, not an actual authenticated session, removing ambiguity about its role.

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 clearly implies this tool is the entry point for a Covidence session and should be used when login is needed. It does not explicitly name when-not-to-use it or mention alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select it ahead of the screening and voting siblings.

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