Examplary MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('Deletes') but doesn't mention whether this is permanent, requires specific permissions, has side effects, or what happens on success/failure. For a destructive operation, this is a significant gap in safety information.

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 with no wasted words. It's appropriately front-loaded with the core action and resource.

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?

For a destructive deletion tool with no annotations, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't address critical aspects like permissions, consequences, error conditions, or return values, leaving the agent with insufficient context for safe invocation.

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 has 0% description coverage, and the description provides no information about the 'id' parameter beyond what's implied by the tool name. It doesn't explain what format the ID should be, where to find it, or what constitutes a valid source material ID.

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 verb ('Deletes') and resource ('the specified source material'), making the purpose unambiguous. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling deletion tools like deleteExamsid or deleteFoldersid, which follow the same pattern for different resources.

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. There are multiple deletion tools for different resources (e.g., deleteExamsid, deleteFoldersid), but no indication of which resource type this applies to or any prerequisites for deletion.

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