A getting-started view for a provider — website, portal, signup, docs, authentication, base URLs, and first steps assembled from its registered links.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | Provider slug — lowercase, hyphenated, as find_providers returns it, e.g. "stripe". | |
| context | No | Optional: one sentence on why you are asking. Never used to rank; read only if a result is wrong. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / properties / context / descriptionPrevious value: -"Optional: why you are asking. One sentence — the task you are trying to complete, or what you expect to get back. Never included in the answer and never used to rank; it is read only when a result turns out to be wrong, which is when knowing the intent is what makes the report actionable."New value: +"Optional: one sentence on why you are asking. Never used to rank; read only if a result is wrong."Input schema / properties / slug / descriptionAdded value: +"Provider slug — lowercase, hyphenated, as find_providers returns it, e.g. \"stripe\"."Input schema / properties / contextAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Optional: why you are asking. One sentence — the task you are trying to complete, or what you expect to get back. Never included in the answer and never used to rank; it is read only when a result turns out to be wrong, which is when knowing the intent is what makes the report actionable.",
+ "type": "string"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety and scope are covered. The phrase 'assembled from its registered links' explains the data provenance, but the description says nothing about behavior when a provider has no registered links, nor about return shape.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence that defines the view before enumerating its parts. The em-dash list is long but every item is informative, so nothing is wasted.
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 output schema, the enumeration of assembled fields effectively describes what comes back, and annotations cover the read-only profile. Only edge-case behavior (missing links, partial data) is unaddressed.
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 description coverage is 100%, so both parameters (slug, context) are already fully documented in the schema, including the find_providers provenance for slug. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.
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 resource (provider onboarding/getting-started view) and enumerates the content it assembles — website, portal, signup, docs, authentication, base URLs, first steps. That is enough for an agent to distinguish it from get_provider or get_provider_apis, though it never names a sibling to sharpen the contrast.
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?
No when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative guidance appears. The only routing hint ('as find_providers returns it') lives in the schema, not the description. An agent must infer that this is for post-discovery orientation.
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.