x-ai-mcp

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 states this is a 'Get' operation, implying read-only behavior, but doesn't address important aspects like authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or what 'detailed profile info' specifically includes. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand how to use it effectively.

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 appropriately concise with two sentences: one stating the purpose and another explaining the parameter. It's front-loaded with the core functionality, though the parameter explanation could be slightly more integrated rather than appearing as a separate 'Args' section.

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 has an output schema (which should document return values), the description doesn't need to explain outputs. However, for a read operation with no annotations and 0% schema description coverage, it should provide more behavioral context about authentication, rate limits, or error handling to be fully complete.

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 description adds meaningful context for the single parameter by explaining that 'username' can be either 'X username (without @) or user ID'. This clarifies the parameter's purpose beyond what the schema provides (which has 0% description coverage and only shows a string type), though it doesn't elaborate on format constraints or examples.

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 'Get' and resource 'detailed profile info for a user', making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like x_followers or x_user_tweets, which also retrieve user-related information but focus on different aspects.

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. It doesn't mention when to choose x_user_info over tools like x_followers (for follower lists) or x_user_tweets (for user's tweets), nor does it specify any prerequisites or exclusions for usage.

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