Устройства с входом в панель

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, covering the safety profile. The description adds valuable context by clarifying that access tokens are not listed and where to find them, which goes beyond what annotations provide. No contradictions found.

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 front-loaded, with only two sentences that each add value. The first sentence introduces the purpose, and the second clarifies an exclusion, both essential for correct usage without redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema) and the presence of clear annotations (readOnly, idempotent), the description fully covers what an agent needs to understand the tool's functionality and boundaries. It is complete for this simple case.

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 has zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%, meaning no parameter info is missing. The description adds no parameter meaning because there are none, but the baseline for 0-parameter tools is 4, as there is nothing to explain.

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 that this tool lists browsers/devices logged into the panel under the account, using a specific verb and resource. It differentiates from siblings by explicitly excluding access tokens, which helps distinguish it from tokens-related tools like bots_reveal_token.

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 implies when to use it (to view logged-in devices) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. It provides context about what is not included (access tokens), but lacks direction on when to use other tools for token management.

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