mcp-freshbooks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions authentication context but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like error handling, rate limits, or whether it's idempotent. The description is accurate but lacks depth for a tool that likely involves API calls and authentication state.

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 that front-loads the key action and resources. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or unnecessary elaboration, 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 the tool's low complexity (0 parameters, no annotations, but with an output schema), the description is reasonably complete. It specifies what information is retrieved, though it could benefit from mentioning the output format or authentication prerequisites. The presence of an output schema reduces the need for return value details.

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 tool has 0 parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%, so there's no need for parameter details in the description. The description appropriately focuses on what the tool returns rather than inputs, aligning with the parameter-less nature.

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 specific action ('Get') and the exact resources returned ('current authenticated user's identity, account ID, and business info'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on authentication/user info rather than CRUD operations on business entities like clients or invoices.

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 implies usage context by specifying 'current authenticated user,' suggesting this tool should be used when needing to verify or retrieve the authenticated user's details. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or provide exclusions, such as whether it requires prior authentication.

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