icloud-mcp

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It successfully discloses behavioral semantics by explaining what the data represents (UIDs for skipping, skip counts for 'smart unsubscribe'), though it omits explicit read-only declaration or performance characteristics.

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?

Single efficient sentence with em-dash separated clauses. Front-loaded with action verb, followed by parenthetical elaboration. Zero waste; every clause explains a specific component of the returned state.

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?

No output schema exists, but description fully compensates by enumerating the specific fields and their semantic purposes (e.g., 'to skip on next run'). Adequate for a parameter-less state retrieval tool.

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?

Input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage. Per rubric, 0 params = baseline 4. Description appropriately does not mention parameters since none exist.

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?

Specific verb ('Get') + resource ('inbox digest state') with clear differentiation from siblings like get_inbox_summary via detailed field enumeration (last run timestamp, processed UIDs, pending actions, per-sender skip counts).

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?

Provides clear context about what data is returned and implies workflow (processed UIDs 'to skip on next run'), but does not explicitly name alternatives (e.g., 'use update_digest_state to modify') or explicit when-not conditions.

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