Qlik MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states this is a 'get' operation, implying read-only behavior, but doesn't specify permissions needed, rate limits, pagination, or what the output format looks like (e.g., list of reload records with timestamps). This leaves significant gaps for a tool that retrieves historical data.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose, making it easy to scan and understand quickly.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool that retrieves historical data. It doesn't explain what 'reload history and status' entails (e.g., timestamps, success/failure states, user details), leaving the agent uncertain about the tool's behavior and output.

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 fully documents both parameters (appId and limit). The description doesn't add any meaning beyond this, such as explaining what an 'appId' represents in Qlik or how 'limit' affects performance. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the 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 verb 'get' and resource 'app reload history and status', making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this from sibling tools like 'qlik_get_reload_status' or 'qlik_get_license_info', which also retrieve information but about different 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. It doesn't mention sibling tools like 'qlik_get_reload_status' (which might provide current status only) or 'qlik_cancel_reload' (which might stop a reload), leaving the agent without context for tool selection.

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