meineba_login_finish

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

The annotations already communicate that this is not read-only, not open-world, and not destructive, so the description carries less burden. It adds the useful detail that a one-time code is exchanged, but does not describe session effects, failure behavior, or what happens to the previous login state.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words, clearly stating the action and the dependency on the start tool.

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 a full output schema and precise parameter schema, the description only needs to orient the agent, which it does by linking to the start tool and naming the one-time-code exchange. Minor gaps remain around session outcomes and error handling, but the core call context is complete.

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%, and the schema already explains that redirect_url is the full post-sign-in browser address containing code= and state=. The description adds no syntax or format meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 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 states a specific verb and resource ('Complete a login') and explicitly links it to the sibling tool 'meineba_login_start', so an agent can distinguish it from other tools without inspecting schemas.

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?

It clearly indicates the context in which to use the tool: completing a login previously initiated via meineba_login_start. It does not list when not to use it or name alternative completion paths, but the dependency is explicit.

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