ie_login_start

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses important runtime behavior: it returns immediately, the login session depends on human password/MFA entry in the browser, and it rejects credentials and arbitrary URLs. This meaningfully adds context about side effects and limitations that annotations alone do not 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 compact and front-loaded with the core operation, then follows with behaviorally important caveats. Every sentence earns its place and there is no 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 tool that only starts a human-driven SSO flow, the description covers its trigger, immediate return behavior, human-only authentication, and non-acceptance of credentials/URLs. Combined with the schema enum and output schema, an agent has enough context to invoke it correctly.

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 single service parameter is fully defined by the schema's enum (connects or blackboard), but the description itself adds no explanation of how the parameter influences the login target. With 0% schema description coverage, the description doesn't compensate, though the enum mitigates the gap.

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 (open or reuse the selected browser), a target (IE/Microsoft SSO), and a condition (only when the user wants to sign in). It also differentiates itself by explicitly saying it does not accept credentials or arbitrary URLs, which distinguishes it from auth configuration or URL-navigation tools.

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 gives a clear condition: use only when the user wants to sign in, and it warns that passwords/MFA are human-only and credentials cannot be supplied. However, it does not explicitly name alternative sibling tools or say when to prefer them instead.

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