Validate a license key or a specific activation instance using only the license key for authentication.
Validate a license key or specific instance. Does not require an API key — uses the license key itself for auth.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| instanceId | No | Optional instance ID to validate a specific activation | |
| licenseKey | Yes | The license key to validate |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.10.10Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint. Description adds that authentication uses the license key itself, a behavioral detail beyond annotations.
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 front-loaded purpose. No superfluous words.
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 read-only validation tool with well-covered schema and annotations, description is complete. No output schema, but return value is implied.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so schema already documents both parameters clearly. Description adds no extra meaning beyond what schema provides.
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 states specific verb 'Validate' and resource 'license key or specific instance'. Distinct from sibling tools like activate, deactivate, get.
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?
Mentions that no API key is needed, giving context for when to use. Doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives, but sibling names imply different actions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.