UNDERSTANDING — Top-rated providers in a region. Priced B1 (single-entity synthesis) — $0.01 per call under pay-as-you-go; included in Understanding and Influence. See apis://prices.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | Region slug, as find_regions returns it, e.g. "north-america". | |
| limit | No | Results per page, 1-100 (default 25). | |
| 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 / limit / descriptionAdded value: +"Results per page, 1-100 (default 25)."Input schema / properties / slug / descriptionAdded value: +"Region slug, as find_regions returns it, e.g. \"north-america\"."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 the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful non-annotation context—the B1 pricing tier and per-call cost—but says nothing about ranking criteria, ordering, or pagination behavior of the returned list.
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?
It is short, but the first token is a category label ("UNDERSTANDING") that does not help tool selection, and the second of two sentences is almost entirely pricing boilerplate. Content is present but not optimally front-loaded for an agent choosing a tool.
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 read-only list tool with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the definition is minimally adequate. It omits what "top-rated" means, how results are ordered, and whether the list is paginated—useful context an agent would otherwise have to discover by calling it.
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%: slug, limit (with range/default), and context are all fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, so the baseline of 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?
"Top-rated providers in a region" names a specific resource (providers), a ranking (top-rated), and a scope (region), so an agent can tell it apart from get_region (single entity). However it never differentiates from the sibling "leaders" family (get_area_leaders, get_country_leaders, get_industry_leaders), leaving the regional-vs-country distinction to be inferred.
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?
There is no guidance on when to call this versus the other leaders tools or find_providers; the only pointer is a pricing reference (apis://prices). Usage context is left entirely to inference.
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.