Shepherd 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 mentions the tool is deprecated, which is useful behavioral context, but does not disclose other traits like authentication needs, rate limits, or what 'detailed information' entails. The description adds some value but lacks comprehensive behavioral details.

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 highly concise and front-loaded, consisting of only two sentences that efficiently convey the deprecation warning and the tool's purpose. Every word serves a clear function, with no wasted information, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 output schema, no annotations), the description is somewhat complete by stating the deprecation and purpose. However, it lacks details on what 'detailed information' includes or behavioral aspects, leaving gaps that could hinder an agent's understanding of the tool's full context.

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 parameter 'session_id' fully documented as 'The UUID of the session to retrieve'. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond this, so it meets the baseline of 3 where the schema handles the parameter semantics effectively.

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 tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('detailed information about a specific AI agent session'), and explicitly distinguishes it from its sibling tool 'aiobs_get_session' by marking it as deprecated. This provides precise differentiation and avoids confusion.

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 explicit usage guidelines by stating '[Deprecated: Use aiobs_get_session]', which clearly indicates when not to use this tool and names the alternative. This direct guidance helps the agent avoid selecting an outdated tool.

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