SD Elements 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 but offers no information beyond the basic action. It does not address critical traits like whether deletion is permanent, requires specific permissions, has side effects (e.g., cascading deletions), or returns any confirmation, making it inadequate for a destructive operation.

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 extremely concise with just three words, front-loading the core action without unnecessary elaboration. Every word earns its place, though this brevity contributes to gaps in other dimensions.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain the deletion behavior, return values, or error conditions, leaving the agent ill-equipped to handle this operation safely and effectively.

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, clearly documenting the 'diagram_id' parameter. The description adds no additional semantic context beyond what the schema provides, such as format examples or constraints, so it meets the baseline score of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 'Delete a diagram' is a tautology that merely restates the tool name and title without adding specificity. It lacks details about what 'delete' entails (e.g., permanent removal, soft deletion) or what a 'diagram' refers to in this context, failing to distinguish it from sibling tools like 'delete_project' or 'update_diagram'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a diagram ID), exclusions, or comparisons to related tools such as 'update_diagram' or 'delete_project', leaving the agent without context for appropriate selection.

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