AroFlo MCP

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Reinforces read-only nature by noting '(GET)' and adds critical behavioral context missing from annotations: pipe-delimited query syntax, available response modes (data/verbose/debug/raw) with default specified, and payload optimization via compact/select options. Does not mention pagination limits or rate limiting.

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?

Information-dense single paragraph appropriately sized for the complexity (complex query DSL with 18 parameters). Front-loaded with purpose declaration. Syntax examples are efficient (pipe-delimited formats, array examples). Reference to external docs resource is useful without being 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?

Adequately covers the domain-specific query language (WHERE/ORDER/JOIN syntax) which schema cannot convey, but fails to explain standard pagination parameters despite their complexity and 0% schema coverage. Output schema exists so return values don't need description.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description partially compensates by documenting 6 of 18 parameters (where, order, join, mode, compact, select) with concrete syntax examples. However, it omits crucial pagination controls (page, pageSize, autoPaginate, maxPages) and utility flags (validateWhere, extra) which are essential for an 18-parameter query tool.

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?

States specific verb (Query), resource (UserPosition zone), and HTTP method (GET). Clearly distinguishes from siblings by naming the specific AroFlo zone it targets, though it could briefly clarify what 'UserPosition' represents (e.g., job title vs. location).

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 detailed syntax guidance for constructing queries (pipe-delimited WHERE clauses, ORDER format), but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this specific zone getter versus the generic aroflo_query_zone or other sibling tools. No prerequisites or exclusion criteria mentioned.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.