wb_add_cabinet

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

The description discloses the key risk ('puts the key into the chat transcript'), the required confirmation flag, the storage location and permissions ('Saved to ~/.marketplace-mcp/cabinets.json (local, chmod 600)'), and that it's never echoed. This adds substantial context beyond the annotations, which only provide idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. No contradictions 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?

The description is compact yet information-dense, with a clear warning upfront and a structured argument list. Every sentence contributes to understanding or safe usage. The format is easy to scan and front-loads the most critical caution.

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?

The tool is a write operation with security implications. The description covers the action, prerequisites, parameter details, side effects, and alternatives. With an output schema present (has output schema: true), return value details are already structured, so nothing essential is missing.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description carries full weight. It explains every parameter: credentials dict with required fields and examples for Ozon and WB, name with fallback behavior, and the mandatory flag. This goes well beyond the bare 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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Add or update a cabinet (a named set of API credentials)'. It clearly distinguishes from the many sibling add_cabinet tools for other platforms by specifying WB in the credentials example and the tool name. It also mentions the 'from chat' context, which sets it apart from installer alternatives.

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 points out a safer alternative: 'The terminal-free safe alternative is the installer (install.py / double-click), where the key never enters chat.' This tells the agent when not to use the tool and what to use instead. It also states the required flag for the risky action.

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