about

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It describes a read-only action without specifying side effects, but since it's a simple informational tool, the basic behavior is clear. Could be improved by noting that no data is modified.

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 a single concise sentence that is front-loaded with the key action. No unnecessary words or redundancy.

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 that the tool has no parameters and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context. It clearly states the purpose and scope. Could elaborate on what kind of information is returned (e.g., version, status), but it is not deficient.

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?

There are no parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. The description does not add parameter details because none are needed. However, it does not describe the return value, which would be helpful. Baseline for zero parameters is 4.

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?

Description clearly states the tool returns information about the iCloud MCP server. It uses a specific verb ('returns') and resource ('information about this iCloud MCP server'), and it is distinctly different from siblings which focus on emails, calendars, contacts, or auth.

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 implies usage context (getting server info) and it is clear that this is the primary tool for that purpose. However, it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives, though no alternatives exist among siblings.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.