Featurebase 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 of behavioral disclosure. It effectively reveals a key trait: the deletion may be 'soft' (not permanent) when the comment has replies, which is crucial for understanding side effects. However, it doesn't cover other aspects like permissions needed, error conditions, or what 'soft delete' entails operationally.

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 action ('Delete a comment') and immediately adds the critical behavioral detail ('soft delete if has replies'). There is zero waste, and every word earns its place by providing essential context.

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 complexity (a mutation with conditional behavior), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the core action and a key behavioral trait, but lacks details on permissions, error handling, or return values, leaving gaps for the agent to infer.

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 100% description coverage, with the 'id' parameter clearly documented. The description adds no additional meaning about the parameter beyond what the schema provides, such as format examples or constraints. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the description doesn't compensate but doesn't need to.

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 ('Delete a comment') and distinguishes it from siblings like 'update_comment' or 'delete_post' by specifying the resource type. It goes beyond a simple verb by adding the conditional behavior ('soft delete if has replies'), which further clarifies its unique purpose.

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 for deleting comments, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'update_comment' or other deletion tools. It mentions a condition ('if has replies') that affects behavior, but doesn't state when to choose this over other options or any prerequisites.

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