authenticate_garmin

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

With annotations limited to a title, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses that a real browser window opens, the user logs in normally, and only session cookies and CSRF token are captured and stored, never the password. It also warns about the headless-environment limitation, which is an important behavioral constraint beyond what the schema or annotations convey.

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 concise and well-structured: first sentence states what the tool does, second specifies exactly when to use it, and third gives the key environmental restriction. Every sentence adds distinct value with no redundancy or filler.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description provides complete operational context: what happens, what is stored, when to invoke it, and what environment it requires. No critical calling information is missing, and the sibling context reinforces the role without needing further detail.

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 the input schema is empty and there is nothing for the description to clarify. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description appropriately avoids inventing parameter details.

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 action ('Authenticate with Garmin Connect'), names the exact resource (connect.garmin.com), and explains the mechanism (opening a real browser window and capturing session cookies/CSRF token). It also differentiates itself from the sibling workout tools by positioning itself as the authentication step tied to check_garmin_auth.

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 explicitly states when to run this tool: whenever check_garmin_auth reports no valid session or another tool returns a 'not authenticated' message. It also gives a clear environmental prerequisite and exclusion—requires a local display and will not work headless—which is valuable routing guidance.

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