Mở MONA Cloud Console

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

The description clarifies that the tool returns a URL rather than actually opening the console, which is useful given the 'open' in the tool name. However, with no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does not disclose any prerequisites, side effects, or URL characteristics such as expiration or authentication requirements.

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 one concise sentence, front-loaded with the primary action 'Trả URL' (return URL). It efficiently conveys purpose and use cases with no wasted words.

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 parameterless tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description adequately explains what the tool returns and why. It could explicitly state the return format (e.g., a string URL) or any required authentication, but these are largely inferable from the description.

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 the input schema is empty, so the baseline for parameter semantics is 4. The description reinforces the tool's purpose but adds no parameter-specific meaning because there are no parameters to document.

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 uses a specific verb 'Trả URL' (return URL) and a specific resource 'console chung' (common console), and lists three clear use cases: topping up wallet, changing budget, or managing account. This distinguishes it from action-oriented siblings like cloud_topup or cloud_budget_set, though it does not explicitly name any alternative.

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 provides clear context by stating the intended use cases ('để nạp ví, đổi budget hoặc quản lý tài khoản'). This tells the agent when the tool is appropriate, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools, so it falls short of a 5.

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