arcadeops_discoverRetourne les ressources publiques ArcadeOps, le guide OAuth et l'adresse du MCP métier protégé. Aucune donnée privée n'est lue.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint already present, the annotations carry the safety profile. The description adds useful context: it returns only public resources, includes the OAuth guide and protected MCP address, and explicitly states no private data is read.
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 two short sentences with no filler. The primary result is front-loaded, and the important safety guarantee about private data is stated briefly.
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 parameterless discovery tool with strong annotations, the description is sufficiently complete: it states what is returned, that the data is public, and that no private data is accessed. It does not describe the exact output shape, but with no output schema and minimal complexity this is a modest gap.
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 has zero parameters, so the schema provides full coverage trivially. The description does not need to document parameters, and it appropriately implies no input is required.
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 description names a specific verb ('Retourne') and concrete resource categories: public ArcadeOps resources, the OAuth guide, and the protected business MCP address. It is clearly distinct from the sibling document retrieval/search tools, though it does not explicitly name them as alternatives.
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?
The description implies usage: use this tool to obtain public ArcadeOps resources, the OAuth guide, or the protected MCP address. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to arcadeops_get_document or arcadeops_search_docs.
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.
Each tool has a clearly distinct role: discover provides the top-level public resources and endpoints, search_docs queries the catalog, and get_document resolves a specific document's canonical link and MIME type. There is no meaningful overlap or ambiguity between them.
All tool names share the arcadeops_ prefix and use snake_case, with a consistent verb-based style. The only minor inconsistency is that discover lacks an explicit object noun while get_document and search_docs both include one.
Three tools is well-scoped for a public discovery server: one for overview/discovery, one for searching the catalog, and one for retrieving a specific document's metadata. Each tool earns its place without redundancy.
The tool set covers the core discovery workflow: discover available resources, search the public catalog, and resolve a specific document link. A minor gap is the lack of a direct list-all-documents endpoint, but search by name and description addresses most practical discovery needs.