Verifies connectivity to the Nextcloud Passwords instance, checking URL, app-password validity, app installation, and that client-side encryption is disabled. Does not read vault data.
Verify connectivity to the configured Nextcloud Passwords instance: that the URL and app-password work, the Passwords app is installed, and client-side encryption is disabled. Reads no vault data.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description reinforces 'Reads no vault data.' It adds specific checks (URL, app-password, app installed, encryption disabled) beyond annotations, providing valuable context for an agent deciding whether to call it. No side effects are implied.
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?
Two sentences with no wasted words. The primary purpose is front-loaded, followed by the specific checks and the read-only guarantee. Every clause earns its place.
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 zero-parameter diagnostic tool with readOnlyHint and openWorldHint annotations, the description fully covers what the tool does and what it does not do. No output schema exists, but for a connectivity check, the agent has everything needed to invoke it 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 tool has zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100% by default. The description adds nothing about parameters because none exist, and there's nothing to clarify. Baseline 4 is appropriate for a no-parameter tool.
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 states a specific verb ('Verify connectivity') and resource (Nextcloud Passwords instance), enumerates exactly what is checked (URL, app-password, app installation, client-side encryption), and clarifies it reads no vault data. This clearly distinguishes it from all sibling data-operation tools like list_passwords or get_password.
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 implicitly signals this is a diagnostic/health-check tool to be used when verifying setup, and explicitly notes it reads no vault data, implying it's safe to call anytime. It does not explicitly name alternatives or conditions, but the purpose is self-evident and no exclusion is needed.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.