SD Elements MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'List all available profiles' implies a read-only operation, it doesn't specify important behavioral aspects like pagination behavior (beyond the page_size parameter in schema), authentication requirements, rate limits, or what 'available' means in this context (active profiles, all profiles regardless of status, etc.).

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 perfectly concise - a single sentence that states exactly what the tool does without any unnecessary words. It's front-loaded with the core functionality and wastes no space on redundant 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 simple list tool with one well-documented parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, without annotations and with multiple similar list tools available, it should ideally provide more context about what profiles are and when to use this specific listing function versus others.

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 fully documents the single parameter (page_size). The description doesn't add any parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema - it doesn't explain default page size, maximum limits, or how pagination works with this tool. 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 action ('List') and resource ('profiles in SD Elements'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from other list tools on the server (like list_projects, list_users, etc.), which would require specifying what makes profiles distinct from those other resources.

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. With multiple list tools available (list_projects, list_users, list_applications, etc.), there's no indication of when profiles specifically should be listed, what context requires profiles, or whether other list tools might be more appropriate for certain scenarios.

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