icloud-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full behavioral disclosure burden. It effectively communicates key traits: it returns 'progress, chunk statuses, and any failures', operates on 'current or most recent' operation (statefulness), and handles 'long-running' async operations.

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?

Three well-structured sentences: first states core purpose, second describes return data, third provides usage guidance. Every sentence earns its place with zero 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?

Despite no output schema, the description adequately explains what information is returned (progress, chunks, failures). Given zero parameters and the specific monitoring purpose, the description provides sufficient context for correct invocation.

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, which per guidelines sets baseline 4. The description correctly implies no inputs are required by focusing entirely on the operation's behavior and output.

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 uses specific verb 'Check' with resource 'status of the current or most recent bulk move operation', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'bulk_move' (which initiates moves) and 'abandon_move' (which cancels them).

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 explicit when-to-use guidance ('Call this to monitor a long-running move or inspect a failed one'), clearly indicating this is for polling/inspection rather than initiation. Does not explicitly name alternative tools, though the context makes the distinction clear.

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