barevalue-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses important behavioral traits: that the operation 'charges credits/subscription minutes' (cost implication) and requires specific inputs from another tool. However, it doesn't describe what happens after submission (processing time, notifications, error handling) or authentication requirements, leaving significant gaps for a mutation tool.

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?

Two sentences, zero waste. First sentence states the core purpose and cost implication. Second sentence specifies prerequisites. Every word serves a clear function. The description is appropriately sized and front-loaded with the most critical information.

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 mutation tool with 9 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description provides adequate basic context about purpose and prerequisites but lacks important behavioral details. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, how long processing takes, error conditions, or authentication requirements. Given the complexity and lack of structured data, it should do more to be 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 9 parameters thoroughly. The description mentions order_id and s3_key as required inputs from barevalue_upload, adding minimal context about their source but no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('submit an uploaded audio file for AI podcast editing'), identifies the resource ('uploaded audio file'), and distinguishes from siblings by specifying it's for files uploaded via barevalue_upload (unlike barevalue_submit_url). It provides a complete purpose statement with no ambiguity.

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?

Explicitly states when to use this tool ('submit an uploaded audio file') and provides clear prerequisites ('requires order_id and s3_key from barevalue_upload'). It distinguishes from barevalue_submit_url by specifying it's for uploaded files rather than URLs. The description effectively guides the agent on proper usage context.

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