Sign all unsigned or outdated agreements for the current user. Required before huaweicloud_sandbox_connect if check-user returns agreementSigned=false. CRITICAL: only call after the user explicitly consents to signing — never sign agreements on the user's behalf without their explicit request.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool performs a state-changing signing action and emphasizes the consent requirement. However, it does not explicitly state the permanence of the action or any additional side effects beyond signing, so a perfect score is not warranted.
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 two sentences, direct, and front-loaded with the action. It includes a critical warning without unnecessary elaboration, making it efficient and well-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?
Given no parameters and no output schema, the description provides all necessary context: what it does, when to call it based on check-user, and the consent prerequisite. It also references related tools to place it in the larger workflow, making it complete for its scope.
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 input schema has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning because there are none, but it correctly omits any irrelevant detail.
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 action: sign all unsigned or outdated agreements for the current user. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by referencing the specific precondition (check-user returning agreementSigned=false) and its role before connect.
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 specifies when to use this tool: required before huaweicloud_sandbox_connect if check-user returns agreementSigned=false. Additionally, it provides a critical usage rule about obtaining explicit user consent before calling, which is clear guidance for the agent.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.