Thenvoi 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 and does well. It discloses that the tool returns a list, excludes self, includes sibling and global agents, and supports filtering via 'not_in_chat'. However, it doesn't mention rate limits, authentication needs, or error conditions, leaving some behavioral aspects uncovered.

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 sized and front-loaded, starting with the core purpose, then usage context, followed by parameter explanations and return value. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it efficient and well-structured.

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 moderate complexity (3 optional parameters) and the presence of an output schema (which covers return values), the description is complete enough. It explains the tool's purpose, usage, parameters, and return format, providing sufficient context for an AI agent to use it 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds significant meaning beyond the schema by explaining each parameter's purpose: 'not_in_chat' filters out agents already in a chat, 'page' and 'page_size' handle pagination. This clarifies what would otherwise be undocumented parameters.

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 ('List') and resource ('agents that can be recruited by the current agent'), specifying what the tool does. It distinguishes from siblings like 'list_user_peers' by focusing on agents rather than users, and from 'list_agent_chats' by listing peers instead of chat rooms.

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 guidance on when to use this tool: 'useful when looking for new collaborators to add.' It also distinguishes from alternatives by noting it excludes self and includes sibling/global agents, helping the agent choose this over other listing tools.

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