login

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

With no annotations, the description must carry transparency. It discloses the JWT token return and its applicability to all project tools, but omits details like token expiration, security implications, or credential handling. Adequate but not rich.

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 three short paragraphs: purpose, usage, and Args. Every sentence is informative, no repetition or fluff. Front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 login tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential actions and expected return. It lacks details on failure modes or prerequisites, but overall it is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description compensates by explaining email and password as 'Symbols account email address' and 'Symbols account password.' This adds minimal value beyond the schema's parameter titles, but is sufficient for simple auth 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?

The description clearly states 'Log in to the Symbols platform and get an access token' with specific verb and resource. It uniquely identifies the authentication purpose, distinguishing it from all sibling tools which are project operations.

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?

Explicitly states 'Use this when the user needs to authenticate before any project operation.' This provides clear when-to-use context, though it does not mention when-not-to-use or alternative authentication methods.

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