configure_cloudbeds_api_key

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the transparency burden. It discloses that a real API call is made for validation, credentials are saved encrypted to a specific file path, the API key is never returned in this or future responses, and a restart is required. This is exemplary disclosure of side effects and security behavior.

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 well-structured in two short paragraphs, and every sentence adds value: purpose, input location, validation process, security guarantee, and next steps. It is slightly longer than strictly needed but remains efficient and readable.

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 description covers the full context: when to use, what inputs are needed and where to find them, what happens during validation, where credentials are stored, the security guarantee about the key, and the necessary post-step (restart). The output schema exists and the description mentions the confirmation response, so nothing 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?

The input schema has zero descriptions for its two parameters, but the description compensates completely by explaining both: the API key and Property ID, including where to find the Property ID in the Cloudbeds panel. It also implies both are required and that they are validated together.

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 the tool configures the Cloudbeds connection on first run, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes this from a generic API call by detailing the validation, encryption, and restart steps, making the purpose unmistakable.

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 explicitly says 'na primeira execução' (on first run) and instructs to restart the MCP server afterward to activate dependent tools. This provides clear when-to-use context, though it doesn't mention explicit alternatives because no siblings exist.

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