accounts_add

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose one genuinely useful trait — the .p8 file is not read into the MCP, only its path is stored — which is security-relevant. It omits what happens on duplicate names, whether the new account becomes active, and what permissions are needed.

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 short sentences with zero waste; the core action is front-loaded and the clarifying disk-path note follows immediately. Nothing is repeated or padded.

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 credential-registering mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential inputs and one important side effect. It is still silent on post-conditions (is the account activated?), duplicate handling, and error behavior, leaving gaps an agent may need.

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 67%, so most parameters are already documented in the schema. The description reinforces keyId, issuerId and keyFile but adds no format or constraint detail beyond the schema, and never mentions the name, scope, or description parameters.

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 — 'Register a new App Store Connect account' — which is clearly distinct from the read/switch/remove account siblings. It does not explicitly name or contrast with those siblings (accounts_switch, accounts_update), so it falls short of a 5.

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 tells the agent what to pass but never when to use this tool versus accounts_switch or accounts_update, nor does it state prerequisites such as generating the API key in App Store Connect first. 'Provide the Key ID...' is input instruction, not usage guidance.

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