Configure Safefy Credentials

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

The description discloses that the environment is automatically detected from the key prefix (pk_sandbox_ or pk_production_) and that environment/baseUrl are configured automatically. This goes beyond the annotations, which only indicate readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=false, adding valuable behavioral context.

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, front-loaded with the purpose, and includes clear do/don't instructions. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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 simple credential configuration tool, the description covers the essential behavior: what it does, which parameters to ask for, and auto-detection of the environment. It doesn't mention the authenticateNow parameter's effect or potential post-configuration actions, but given the tool's simplicity and the annotations, it is reasonably complete.

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 schema already provides descriptions for publicKey and secretKey with prefix examples, and the description essentially reinforces this. However, authenticateNow has no description in the schema and is not addressed in the tool description, leaving a gap. The description does clarify the auto-detection mechanism, which adds some value beyond the schema.

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: 'Configura as credenciais da conta' (Configures account credentials). It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_configuration and authenticate by focusing on credential setup. The explicit mention of publicKey and secretKey further clarifies the scope.

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 provides clear usage context: it tells the agent to ask only for publicKey and secretKey, and explicitly says not to ask for environment or baseUrl. While it doesn't name alternative tools, the context implies this is the initial configuration step, and the do/don't guidance is useful for correct invocation.

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