neurover_account_setup

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and non-destructive, and the description supplies the reason: the tool does not create the account itself, it returns a terminal command for the user to run, keeping the password out of chat. That is real behavioral value beyond the annotations. It stops short of saying what the returned command looks like or what happens after the user executes it.

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?

One compact sentence, front-loaded with the action and immediately followed by the key mechanism and security constraint. No filler; the only cost is that the terse phrasing leaves the parameter unexplained.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, an agent still needs to know what to pass as "account" and roughly what the returned command is. The description covers the mechanism but leaves the input side entirely to an undocumented schema.

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?

Wait — schema description coverage is 0% for the single "account" parameter, and the description never explains whether it is a name, an identifier, or optional. Since the schema documents nothing, the description must compensate and does not.

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 names a specific verb and resource ("Добавить новый аккаунт") and adds the crucial detail that the result is a terminal command rather than a performed action. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like neurover_accounts or neurover_login, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

Usage is implied by "добавить новый аккаунт" and the note that the password is never sent to chat, which hints at the onboarding scenario. However, no alternative is named (e.g., when to use this versus neurover_login or neurover_browser_login), and no prerequisites are stated.

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