Authorize with Backblaze B2 and retrieve account ID, API URL, and download URL to verify credentials and obtain access endpoints.
Authorize with B2 and return account info including accountId, apiUrl, and downloadUrl. The server handles authorization automatically, but this tool is useful for verifying credentials and retrieving account details.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description states that the tool returns account info and lists the specific fields. It does not explicitly mention side effects, but the annotations indicate readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, which are consistent with a read operation. The behavior is generally transparent.
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?
The description is concise, consisting of two sentences that convey the purpose and usage. It is focused and free of unnecessary detail, making it easy to read and understand.
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 that there is no output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool returns (accountId, apiUrl, downloadUrl). It also provides context on how authorization is handled. There is no missing essential information for an agent to use this tool correctly.
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?
The input schema is empty ({}), so there are no parameters to describe. The description does not add any parameter information, but since there are none, this is fully appropriate. Schema coverage is 100% with no gaps.
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 clearly states the tool's purpose: authorize with B2 and return account info including accountId, apiUrl, and downloadUrl. It specifies the action and the output, leaving no ambiguity about what the tool does.
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?
The description provides guidance on when to use the tool: it notes that the server handles authorization automatically, but the tool is useful for verifying credentials and retrieving account details. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives, but the context is clear enough.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.