Authenticate to DeepSeek Harness with a local launch URL only when needed. Stores cookies privately and never requires model API keys.
Authenticate using a user-provided local Harness launch URL only when AUTH_REQUIRED. Stores cookie privately; never asks for model API keys.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| launch_url | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses that it stores a cookie privately and never asks for model API keys, which is useful behavioral context. However, it doesn't mention side effects beyond cookie storage (e.g., session state changes, idempotency) or potential errors, so coverage is partial.
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?
Two sentences with no waste, the core purpose is stated first, and the condition is front-loaded. Perfectly concise and structured.
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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers its purpose, usage condition, and a key behavioral trait. It could mention what happens after authentication (e.g., whether session state is updated) but that might be implied. Minor gaps remain, but overall it is complete enough for an agent to call 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 schema provides only a string with minLength, no description. The description adds meaning by specifying it is a 'local Harness launch URL' and used for authentication, which helps an agent understand the parameter. However, it doesn't elaborate on URL format validation, so it's adequate but not exhaustive.
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 the tool authenticates using a local Harness launch URL, with a specific condition (only when AUTH_REQUIRED). It distinguishes from siblings which are session management tools, making the purpose unambiguous.
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 explicitly specifies when to use the tool ('only when AUTH_REQUIRED'), which is a clear usage condition. It doesn't name alternatives, but sibling tool names imply different purposes; the condition alone provides adequate guidance for an agent.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.