Pythia MCP

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool retrieves metadata but does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether it's read-only, requires authentication, has rate limits, or what the output format looks like (e.g., JSON structure). This leaves significant gaps for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Retrieve detailed metadata') without any wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a simple retrieval tool.

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 the tool's low complexity (single parameter, no nested objects) and high schema coverage, the description is minimally adequate. However, with no output schema and no annotations, it fails to explain return values or behavioral aspects, leaving the agent with incomplete context for proper use.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, with the parameter 'recid' fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as examples or constraints on the record ID format. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles parameter documentation.

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 detailed metadata') and resource ('for a specific CERN Open Data record'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'list_cern_opendata_files' (which lists files) and 'search_cern_opendata' (which searches). It precisely identifies the operation as retrieval by record ID.

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 context by specifying 'by its record ID,' indicating this tool is for fetching a known record rather than searching or listing. However, it does not explicitly state when to use alternatives like 'search_cern_opendata' or 'list_cern_opendata_files,' missing explicit exclusions or comparisons.

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