Convert CMYK to hex color.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| c | Yes | Cyan (0-100) | |
| k | Yes | Key/Black (0-100) | |
| m | Yes | Magenta (0-100) | |
| y | Yes | Yellow (0-100) |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| hex | Yes | ||
| rgb | Yes | ||
| cmyk | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It only states the conversion, omitting details like output format (e.g., whether hex includes a '#'), error handling for out-of-range values, or any validation behavior.
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 very concise (5 words) but lacks necessary structure and detail. It could be improved by front-loading key information, but it is not verbose.
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?
Despite an output schema existing (not shown), the description does not explain what the returned hex format looks like. Among many sibling color tools, the description is insufficiently complete for an agent to confidently invoke this tool.
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?
Input schema has 100% description coverage, so the schema already explains each parameter (c, m, y, k with ranges 0-100). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema.
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 'Convert CMYK to hex color' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly stating the tool's function. It is distinct from sibling tools like hex_to_cmyk or rgb_to_hex, as it explicitly converts from CMYK to hex.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternative color conversion tools. For example, it does not mention that hex_to_cmyk is the inverse operation, leaving the agent without decision context.
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.
