Report this operator's configuration readiness.
Shows which operator settings are configured, which are missing, and how to deliver each missing value. For patron-level credential status, use get_patron_onboarding_status instead. Free.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It explains what the tool shows (configured/missing settings and delivery guidance) without contradicting any annotations. Additional context like authentication is not stated but assumed for the domain.
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 succinct sentences: purpose, details, and alternative. No wasted words; information is front-loaded.
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?
With no parameters and an output schema, the description fully informs about the tool's function and output. It covers what the tool does, what it shows, and how it differs from a sibling.
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?
No parameters exist, so there is no ambiguity. The schema coverage is 100%, and the description adds no misleading parameter info. With 0 parameters, the baseline is 4, but perfection warrants 5.
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's purpose with a specific verb ('Report') and resource ('operator's configuration readiness'). It also distinguishes itself from sibling tool 'get_patron_onboarding_status'.
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 tells when to use this tool (for operator readiness) and when to use an alternative (for patron-level credentials). The phrase 'Free' hints at no cost barrier.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.