Mở MONA Cloud Console

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered structurally. The description confirms it is a URL-returning read but adds nothing beyond the annotations (no auth requirements, no rate limits, no mention of the URL's persistence/expiry). A 3 is appropriate given the low bar set by 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?

Two tight sentences, front-loading the core purpose (return the console URL) before the routing caveat about cloud_topup. Every sentence earns its place with zero filler.

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?

With no parameters, no output schema, and annotations covering the safety/idempotency profile, the description supplies everything needed: what it returns, when to call it, and which sibling handles the adjacent top-up case.

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 takes zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so there is nothing for the description to clarify; the baseline for a no-param tool is 4. No parameter-related detail is missing.

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+resource: returns the console URL so the user can view invoices or manage their account. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling cloud_topup by explicitly saying top-up does not need the console. An agent can identify its role without opening the schema.

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?

Gives an explicit when-to-use trigger (user wants to self-view invoices or manage account) and an explicit when-not with an alternative: top-up should use cloud_topup with the terminal QR instead. This is textbook routing guidance to a sibling.

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