kimi_setup

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'Generate... config entry,' which implies a write operation, but does not mention side effects, permissions, or the dual preview/write mode hinted by the 'write' parameter. The 'write' parameter schema description adds some context, but the description itself is silent on behavior.

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 very brief (one sentence), but it is under-specified rather than concise. Important details about the tool's function and parameters are omitted, so the brevity does not serve the agent effectively.

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 six parameters (none required), no output schema, and no annotations, the description is critically incomplete. It does not explain what a 'Kimi-hosted MCP config entry' is, how the parameters affect the output, or what the tool returns. The agent lacks adequate information to use the tool correctly.

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 schema description coverage is only 17% (one parameter documented), and the tool description adds no additional meaning or context for the six parameters. The description does not explain any of the parameters, leaving the agent to infer from parameter names alone.

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 states 'Generate the Kimi-hosted MCP config entry for Ladder_mcp,' which provides a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like kimi_ask or kimi_code that focus on queries or code. However, the term 'Ladder_mcp' is ambiguous and the phrase 'MCP config entry' is not elaborated, slightly reducing clarity.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor are there any prerequisites or usage contexts mentioned. The description lacks any 'when to use' or 'when not to use' information.

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