ChartMogul MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It effectively discloses key behavioral traits: it's a read operation ('Retrieve'), returns a complete account object with specific fields and formats, and includes an example response. However, it doesn't cover aspects like error handling, authentication needs, or rate limits, leaving some gaps.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by details on returns and an example. Every sentence adds value: identifying the API, specifying the action, detailing the response structure, and providing an illustrative example without redundancy.

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 0 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is largely complete for a simple retrieval tool. It covers the purpose, return values, and an example. However, it lacks information on error cases or system constraints, which could be useful for full contextual understanding.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description explicitly states 'No parameters required,' which adds clarity beyond the schema by confirming the absence of inputs, aligning with the high schema coverage.

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 specific action ('Retrieve your ChartMogul account information') and resource ('account information'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like retrieve_customer or retrieve_contact. It provides concrete details about what is retrieved, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 implies usage when account information is needed, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., other retrieve_* tools for different resources). It mentions 'No parameters required,' which provides some context, but lacks explicit guidance on scenarios or prerequisites.

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