list_enrollmentsLists recent device enrollments newest first, with filters for enrollment type (including Apple DEP) and user email to confirm newly set-up devices enrolled.
List recent device enrollments, newest first. Use type 'DEP' for Apple Automated Device Enrollment. Helpful for confirming that a newly set-up device enrolled.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | ||
| rows | No | ||
| type | No | Only this enrollment type. | |
| user_email | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered elsewhere. The description adds useful behavior beyond that: results are ordered newest-first and scoped to 'recent' enrollments. It does not say how far back 'recent' reaches, what fields come back, or how paging interacts with that window.
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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and ordering, then the usage hint and enum clarification. Nothing is padded and no sentence is redundant.
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 read-only list tool the annotations cover safety and there is no output schema to explain, which lowers the bar. Still, an agent cannot tell the default result window, whether an empty list means 'not enrolled', or what a row contains, which matters for the stated verification use case.
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 only 25%, so the description must carry the parameter burden. It expands 'DEP' into Apple Automated Device Enrollment, which is genuinely useful, but page, rows and user_email are left entirely undocumented in both schema and description, so the description fails to compensate for the coverage gap.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('List recent device enrollments') plus an ordering guarantee ('newest first'), which an agent can act on directly. It does not differentiate itself from nearby siblings such as list_devices or sync_apple_dep_devices, so the boundary between 'enrollments' and 'devices' is left to inference.
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?
Offers one concrete scenario ('confirming that a newly set-up device enrolled') and explains the DEP enum value, which is real when-to-use guidance. It gives no exclusions or named alternatives, so an agent choosing between this and list_devices/list_suspended_devices gets no routing help.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.