SeedreamMCP

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Only behavioral disclosure is 'Returns: Formatted list...' which partially covers output format. Missing: idempotency guarantees, caching behavior, rate limits, or side effects. Given output schema exists, return value disclosure is less critical, but other behavioral traits remain undocumented.

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?

Well-structured with clear sections (purpose, usage conditions, returns). No redundant text. Bullet points for usage scenarios improve scannability. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Tool has zero parameters and low complexity. Output schema exists (per context signals), so description appropriately avoids detailing return values beyond high-level format. Complete for a simple listing utility, though explicit mention of 'no parameters required' could reinforce the empty schema.

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?

Zero parameters present. Per scoring rules, 0 params = baseline 4. Schema is empty object with 100% coverage, requiring no additional semantic clarification in description.

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?

Description states specific verb ('List') + resource ('image sizes and resolution options') + scope ('for Seedream'). Clearly distinguishes from siblings like seedream_generate_image or seedream_edit_image by focusing on metadata retrieval rather than image manipulation.

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?

Provides explicit 'Use this when:' section with three clear scenarios (user asks about sizes, helping choose resolution, understanding options). Lacks explicit 'when not to use' or named alternatives (e.g., 'don't use for generation, use seedream_generate_image'), but context is clear.

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