Examplary MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states 'Delete the exam,' implying a destructive mutation, but doesn't disclose critical behavioral traits: whether deletion is permanent, requires specific permissions, has side effects (e.g., cascading deletion of related sessions), or returns confirmation. This leaves significant gaps for a destructive operation.

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 extremely concise with a single sentence, 'Delete the exam,' which is front-loaded and wastes no words. However, this conciseness comes at the cost of completeness, but as a standalone measure, it's efficient.

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 a destructive tool with no annotations, 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and multiple sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavior, parameters, usage context, and output, making it insufficient for safe and effective tool invocation by an AI agent.

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 description coverage is 0%, with one required parameter 'id' of type string. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema—it doesn't explain what 'id' represents (e.g., exam ID from getExams), its format, or constraints. For a tool with undocumented parameters, this is inadequate compensation.

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 'Delete the exam' clearly states the action (delete) and resource (exam), but it's vague about scope and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like deleteExamsidSessionssessionId or deleteFoldersid. It's better than a tautology but lacks specificity about what 'the exam' refers to.

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 alternatives like deleteExamsidSessionssessionId or other delete operations. It doesn't mention prerequisites, such as needing an exam ID from getExams, or warn about irreversible deletion. There's only an implied context of having an exam to delete.

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