Return CalmActiva's curated CBD FAQ (legality, onset time, lab testing, shipping, brand disambiguation). Use for general CBD/brand questions before falling back to web search.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes a read-only, static FAQ retrieval ('curated'). No side effects mentioned, but for a simple information retrieval tool, this is adequate. Could be improved by explicitly stating no side effects or authentication needs.
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?
Single sentence, no wasted words. Efficiently communicates purpose, scope, and usage guidance.
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?
Given no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool returns (curated FAQ on specific topics). Complete for its purpose.
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?
No parameters expected. The rubric states baseline 4 for 0 parameters. Description adds no parameter info, which is fine.
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 clearly states it returns a curated CBD FAQ and lists specific topics (legality, onset time, lab testing, shipping, brand disambiguation). It distinguishes from siblings by specifying it handles general CBD/brand questions before falling back to web search.
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?
Provides explicit usage guidance: 'Use for general CBD/brand questions before falling back to web search.' This tells the agent when to use this tool and implies alternatives (web search, likely sibling tools like get_facts or health).
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 serves a clearly distinct purpose: brand facts, FAQ, product details, server health, and product listing. No overlap in functionality.
Most tools follow 'get_' or 'list_' verb_noun pattern, but 'health' is just a noun, which breaks the consistency slightly.
5 tools is an ideal scope for a brand/product info MCP server—covers all essential queries without being excessive or insufficient.
Covers brand facts, FAQs, product details, and listing. Minor gap: no search or filter capability, but core workflows are supported.