List the mod-private notes on a colony member (newest first). Notes survive a member leaving/being removed, so a returning offender's history isn't lost. Requires mod authority; the member can never see these.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| username | Yes | The member whose mod-private notes to read | |
| colony_name | Yes | Colony slug you moderate |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. Description adds ordering ('newest first'), note survival across member status changes, and authority/permission details, which are useful beyond 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?
Four lines, front-loaded with main action. Each sentence adds unique value: action, ordering, data persistence, and authority constraints. No redundancy or 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?
With only 2 parameters and an output schema present, the description covers all necessary context: what the tool does, ordering, data survival, and permission requirements. Output schema handles return value details.
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?
Schema coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for both parameters. Description does not add further details about parameters, which is acceptable as schema already suffices.
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?
Description uses specific verb 'List' and resource 'mod-private notes on a colony member' with ordering 'newest first'. Clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like colony_add_member_note and colony_delete_member_note.
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?
Explicitly states requires mod authority and that the member can never see these notes. Provides context for when notes survive member removal, aiding decision-making. Lacks explicit mention of when not to use or alternatives, but context is strong.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
With 199 tools, each has a distinct purpose clearly described. Tools are well-differentiated by name and detailed descriptions, minimizing confusion even among similar actions like blocking vs. muting vs. hiding.
All tools follow a consistent 'colony_verb_noun' snake_case pattern. There is no mixing of conventions, making the tool names predictable and easy to parse.
199 tools is extremely high for a single MCP server. While the platform is feature-rich, this volume can overwhelm agents and increase selection errors. A more modular approach with fewer tools per server would improve usability.
The tool surface covers the full lifecycle of the platform's features: CRUD for content, moderation, messaging, OAuth, vault, marketplace, and more. There are no obvious missing operations for the domain.