connect_account

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses that the tool opens a browser, saves the API key locally after authorization, and mentions the free tier limit of 5 scans/month. These are meaningful behavioral side effects beyond a generic 'connect account' statement.

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 front-loaded with the core action and then adds relevant details about the flow, limitations, and alternatives. It is slightly longer than minimal, but every sentence adds useful context such as free-tier limits and env-var setup, so no sentence feels wasted.

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 is complete enough for invocation: it names the trigger, the browser flow, the local key storage, and alternatives. It doesn't describe the return value or behavior if the user is already authenticated, but for a zero-parameter auth tool this is a minor gap and not likely to cause misinvocation.

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 and full schema coverage, so there is no parameter meaning for the description to add. The description instead provides useful surrounding context about what happens during the flow, which is appropriate for a parameterless auth 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 clearly identifies a specific action: connecting a CyberLens account to the MCP server. It explains the browser-based sign-up/login flow and what happens after authorization, making the tool distinct from the scanning and quota siblings.

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?

It gives explicit context for when this tool is relevant and provides an alternative: users with an existing API key can set CYBERLENS_API_KEY instead. It also notes that cloud tools may launch this flow automatically, clarifying how the tool fits into automated workflows.

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