ms_add_cabinet

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

Adds critical behavioral context beyond annotations: warns that key enters chat transcript, explains storage details (~/.marketplace-mcp/cabinets.json with chmod 600), and confirms 'never echoed'. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Well-structured with clear warning, bullet-like parameter descriptions. Slightly lengthy due to examples and safety emphasis, but every sentence adds value.

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?

Complete for a credential-adding tool: covers purpose, usage, parameter semantics, security considerations, and storage location. Output schema exists, so return values are not needed.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description fully explains all three parameters: credentials (with examples for Ozon and WB), name (optional label and fallback behavior), and the boolean safety flag. Adds meaning beyond the input schema.

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 'Add or update a cabinet (a named set of API credentials)', using specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like ms_remove_cabinet by focusing on creation/update.

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?

Explicitly provides when-to-use vs alternatives: mentions installer as safer alternative and requires the safety flag i_understand_key_goes_to_chat=true. No misleading statements.

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