memeswap_social_providers
List social connect providers (GET /api/social/providers). OAuth still requires a human browser session.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
List social connect providers (GET /api/social/providers). OAuth still requires a human browser session.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and non-destructive behavior, so safety is covered. The description adds a genuinely useful constraint outside the structured data: OAuth cannot be completed programmatically and requires a human browser session, which shapes how the agent should act on the results.
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?
Two short sentences, purpose first, caveat second. No filler and no redundancy with the schema or annotations.
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 simple zero-argument read tool this is nearly sufficient, but with no output schema the description could briefly indicate what a provider listing contains, which would help the agent interpret 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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies; there is nothing for the schema or description to disambiguate.
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?
States a specific verb (List) and resource (social connect providers) and even names the underlying endpoint. No sibling tool in the set covers provider discovery, so the agent can distinguish it immediately.
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 rather than stated: the note about OAuth needing a human browser session hints that this tool is for discovery and cannot complete a connection, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance.
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.