authStatusCheck Microsoft sign-in status without prompting login. Shows cached account and token cache location.
Report whether the user is signed in to Microsoft, which account is cached, and where the token cache lives. Safe to call at any time; never triggers a sign-in prompt.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description goes beyond the readOnly and openWorld annotations by guaranteeing it never triggers a sign-in prompt and by specifying exactly what information is returned. This is valuable behavioral context for an agent.
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 concise sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the purpose, the second provides safety guidance. Perfectly front-loaded and appropriately sized.
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?
This is a simple read-only status check with no parameters and no output schema. The description fully covers what it does, its safety, and its return content, so no additional context is needed.
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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds meaning by explaining what the tool reports, but there are no parameter semantics to clarify.
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 uses the specific verb 'Report' and clearly states the resource (authentication status) and the exact details reported: whether signed in, which account is cached, and token cache location. This is distinct from sibling tools like authenticate and signOut.
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 says 'Safe to call at any time' and 'never triggers a sign-in prompt,' providing clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools for signing in or out, so it stops short of a 5.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.