START HERE — first call, no arguments, no key, no charge. Who Signal Bureau is and what we are not, the tests you can run to check that claim yourself, what is free (most of it), what is paid (Watches and Reads) at live published prices, how to propose coverage we don't carry, and how buying works. Read this before evaluating anything else here.
| 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?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses 'no arguments, no key, no charge' – key operational facts. It also sets expectations about content ('what we are not', 'tests to check that claim'). While it doesn't mention rate limits or response format, the tool is purely informational, so coverage is strong.
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 a single, long sentence but front-loads the critical 'START HERE' and 'no arguments, no key, no charge' information. It is dense but efficient; slight verbosity in enumerating topics is acceptable for an onboarding 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 an intro tool with no parameters or output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: identity, verification tests, pricing, content proposals, and purchase process. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to use it correctly.
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 baseline is 4. The description reinforces that no arguments are needed, adding clarity without redundancy.
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?
Description states a specific purpose: it is the entry point for learning about Signal Bureau. The verb 'START HERE' and content list (who we are, tests, free/paid, buying) clearly define the resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by being the mandatory first call.
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?
Explicitly instructs 'first call' and 'Read this before evaluating anything else here', providing unambiguous timing and priority relative to other tools. No alternative is needed since it is the intended initial step.
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.
