Discover Capabilities

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, destructive, idempotent, and openWorld hints. Description adds that unavailable tools carry available=false, gated_by env var info, and self-exclusion. Adds value beyond annotations.

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?

Two well-structured sentences with bullet-like details. No fluff, every sentence adds value. Front-loaded with primary purpose.

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 output schema exists, description explains return format variations fully. Covers all parameter behaviors, valid domains, and edge cases (unavailable, gated_by). Complete for this tool's purpose.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description fully explains each parameter's effect: domain returns domain-specific tools with availability metadata; no domain returns index and counts; list_all_tools=true returns flat list. Adds critical meaning.

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 it is a 'Canonical inventory of Automox MCP tools, organized by domain,' with a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes itself from over 100 sibling tools as a directory that excludes itself.

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?

Explicitly says 'prefer this over cached manifests' and describes when to use domain vs no domain, but does not list explicit exclusions or alternatives.

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