Gatekeeper-double fetch for evidence (per-bot default)
Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {
"agent_id": "<agent_id>",
"site": "<site>"
},
"name": "gatekeeper_fetch"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| site | Yes | ||
| agent_id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It reveals almost nothing about side effects, permissions, rate limits, idempotency, or what 'double fetch' means in practice.
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 very short but under-specified rather than effectively concise. It is a jargon fragment that does not front-load a clear action or outcome.
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 no annotations, no output schema, and zero schema description coverage for two required parameters, the description is far too thin to support correct invocation. It leaves the agent guessing about inputs, behavior, and expected results.
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 schema has 0% description coverage for two required parameters, site and agent_id, and the description does not mention either parameter. An agent has no information about what values these parameters expect or how they affect the fetch.
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 phrase 'Gatekeeper-double fetch for evidence' hints at fetching evidence, but it is jargon-heavy and does not clearly state what the tool actually does or returns. It does not distinguish the tool from any sibling such as verdict_query or verify_attestation.
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?
'(per-bot default)' suggests a default mode but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are no exclusions or prerequisites described.
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.