get_digimonGet full details for one Digimon by name or numeric id: its level, type, attribute, fields, evolution lines, and English description. Keyless.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | Yes | A Digimon name like "Agumon" or a numeric id like "1". |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "name": "Agumon"
+ },
+ {
+ "name": "1"
+ }
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. The description adds 'Keyless' (no auth needed) and lists returned details, providing useful context beyond annotations.
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?
One sentence, front-loaded with purpose, no waste. Every word earns its place.
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 simple read tool with no output schema, the description fully covers what the agent needs: how to call, what is returned, and that no auth is required.
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 has 100% description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description echoes the schema's format (name or id) but adds no extra semantic depth.
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 the verb 'get' and the resource 'full details for one Digimon', naming specific fields returned. It distinguishes from sibling 'search_digimon' which lists multiple.
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 is clear that this tool is for a single Digimon lookup by name or id, which implies it's for one record versus search. However, it does not explicitly say when not to use or mention alternatives.
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.