get_credential_setup_instructions

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns instructions and never returns Cookie values, which is transparent about its behavior. It does not mention side effects or authorization needs, but for a read-only instructional tool, this is adequate.

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, no wasted words. The first sentence front-loads the purpose, and the second provides usage context. Every 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?

Given zero parameters and no output schema, the description is complete: it explains what is returned (setup instructions), when to call (after installation if not configured), and explicitly states it does not return Cookie values. No gaps for the tool's simplicity.

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. The description adds significant value by explaining the purpose and output beyond the empty schema. It fully compensates for the lack of parameter details, meeting the baseline of 4 and exceeding by clearly describing what the tool does.

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 returns safe Bilibili Cookie setup instructions, identifies the target users (users or installing agents), and specifies the resource (Cookie setup instructions). It differentiates from sibling tools like check_bilibili_credentials by focusing on setup guidance.

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 explicitly says 'Call this after installing the MCP server if credentials are not configured,' providing direct when-to-use guidance. It also clarifies what it does not do ('Never returns Cookie values'). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternative tools.

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