Synchronize KooCLI credentials to OBS config (~/.obsutilconfig). KooCLI and OBS use separate credential stores — hcloud commands work fine but OBS commands fail with "Please set ak, sk" unless this sync is done. Run this once to enable OBS operations; re-run after changing hcloud credentials.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| profile | No | Optional KooCLI profile name. Uses the active profile by default. |
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 provided, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses that the tool writes to a local config file, that it is a one-time setup expected to be re-run, and that it addresses a cross-store credential mismatch. It does not state whether existing OBS config values are overwritten or what happens on an invalid profile, but the core mutation behavior is transparent.
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?
Three sentences with zero waste: the first states the core action and target, the second explains why the tool exists, the third gives run-time guidance. The core action is front-loaded and each sentence earns its place.
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 low-complexity tool (one optional param, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers what, why, and when. Minor gaps remain around success confirmation and overwrite semantics, but nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.
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 100%: the single optional 'profile' parameter is already fully documented with its default behavior. The tool description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but per the rubric the baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the load.
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 opens with a specific verb-resource pair: 'Synchronize KooCLI credentials to OBS config (~/.obsutilconfig)'. It names the exact artifact touched and the failure mode it fixes, which distinguishes it from sibling auth tools like huaweicloud_auth_init or huaweicloud_auth_sync that manage credentials in other stores.
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 gives explicit trigger conditions: run once to enable OBS operations and re-run after changing hcloud credentials, with the concrete symptom (OBS commands fail with 'Please set ak, sk') that signals when the tool is needed. It stops short of explicitly naming alternatives or exclusions among the huaweicloud_auth_* siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.