Microsoft 365 MCP Server

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Fails to disclose whether selection is persistent across sessions, affects subsequent tool calls, requires prior authentication, or what happens if the accountId is invalid. 'Select' implies state mutation but lacks essential behavioral context.

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 sentence is not verbose, but for a tool managing authentication state with zero annotations, this constitutes underspecification rather than efficient communication. Front-loaded but insufficiently detailed.

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 this is an authentication management tool with no annotations, no output schema, and unclear relationship to the broader auth lifecycle (login/logout/remove), the description fails to provide adequate context for safe 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?

Schema has 100% description coverage ('The account ID to select'), so the parameter is documented. The description adds no additional semantics about the format of accountId or how to obtain it, meeting baseline expectations for high-coverage schemas.

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 the verb (select) and resource (Microsoft account) but uses vague phrasing 'to use' without clarifying whether this sets a session default, switches context for subsequent calls, or validates the account exists. Does not distinguish from sibling `login` or `list-accounts`.

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 no guidance on when to invoke this tool versus `login`, `logout`, or `list-accounts`. Missing prerequisite information (e.g., that `list-accounts` should be called first to obtain valid IDs) and no mention of when selection is necessary.

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