Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• edenred_list_transactionsA
  3.5/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, etc. Description adds 'inclusive date range' but lacks details on pagination, result limits, or any behavioral quirks.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Single sentence, front-loaded with key info. No unnecessary words.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Adequate for a simple list tool with good annotations and schema coverage, but missing description of return format or available fields, which is needed since there is no output schema.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100% and both parameters are well-described in the schema. Description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Description clearly states action (list), resource (Edenred Plus transactions), and criteria (inclusive date range). It distinguishes from siblings like edenred_get_balances and edenred_find_deals.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. No mention of prerequisites or context for selecting this tool.

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

• edenred_get_balancesA
  3.7/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description need not restate that. The description adds behavioral context (balances belong to wallets/accounts, not cards), which clarifies the tool's scope beyond annotations. No contradictions.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Two concise sentences. The verb and resource are front-loaded. Every word adds value with no redundancy.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given no input schema and no output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool returns (balances, limits, cards). It could benefit from mentioning if results are paginated or how to interpret limits, but is sufficient for a simple getter.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  No parameters exist, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no param info because none is needed; this aligns with the baseline for zero-parameter tools.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Description clearly states the verb 'Get' and specific resources ('Edenred Plus account and benefit-wallet balances, limits, and associated cards'). It provides a key distinction (balances belong to wallets/accounts, not cards), but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like edenred_list_transactions.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings (e.g., when to check balances vs. list transactions or find deals). No context about prerequisites or exclusions is provided.

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

• edenred_find_dealsA
  4.2/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false. The description adds behavioral context: the catalogue is French, implying search terms need translation, and suggests omitting query to browse. It also implies only active discounts are returned, going 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.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a usage instruction. No redundant text; every sentence earns its place.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given no output schema, the description adequately explains purpose and usage. Annotations cover safety traits. The description misses mentioning pagination or result limits, but the schema defines limit. It is sufficient for an AI agent to understand when and how to invoke the tool.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 75% (3 of 4 params have descriptions). The description adds guidance on the query parameter (translate to French or omit), but does not elaborate on limit, category, or active_on beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate with minor added value.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool finds active Edenred Plus discounts for shopping, brands, products, etc., and advises calling it before recommending a purchase. It distinguishes from sibling tools (login, auth, balances, transactions) which handle different actions. The verb 'find' and resource 'discounts' are specific.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides explicit usage context: 'Call this before recommending a purchase.' It advises translating broad search terms to French or omitting query to browse, aiding when to use. While it doesn't explicitly list alternatives, siblings are distinct enough that no confusion arises.

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

• edenred_auth_statusA
  4.4/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent behavior. The description adds that it never returns credentials/tokens and lists possible statuses, providing extra context 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.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Single, well-structured sentence with no fluff. Includes key states and a safety note.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Covers purpose and behavior well. Lacks mention of return format (e.g., string or object), but listing possible statuses provides enough context for interpretation.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  No parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. Description adds no parameter info but none is needed. Baseline 4 is appropriate.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the verb 'Check' and specific resource 'local Edenred browser login status', listing possible states. It distinguishes from siblings like edenred_start_login, which initiates login.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Purpose is clear but no explicit when/when-not guidance. However, the mention of 'never returns credentials or tokens' provides safety context, and sibling tools imply usage before other actions.

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

• edenred_start_loginA
  4.8/5.0
  Behavior5/5

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

  Annotations already indicate non-readonly (readOnlyHint=false) and external interaction (openWorldHint=true). The description adds key behavioral detail: 'The token stays in MCP memory and is never returned.' This clarifies token handling and emphasizes that the tool does not expose the token, which is important for security. No contradictions.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Two concise sentences that each add value. First sentence specifies the action; second provides usage trigger and token behavior. No extraneous information.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a simple authentication tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential points: action, trigger condition, and token lifecycle. It could mention return behavior (e.g., success/failure), but given that it opens an external browser, the return may be minimal. The description is adequate for an AI agent to understand when and how to use it.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to elaborate on parameters. Baseline of 4 is appropriate as the description focuses on the action and usage context.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Clearly states verb 'Open' and resource 'browser for local Edenred Plus login'. Specifically distinguishes from sibling tools which handle different operations (status, balances, transactions, deals) by being the authentication initiation tool. Provides explicit condition for use (AUTH_REQUIRED or AUTH_EXPIRED).

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines5/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Explicitly states when to call: 'Call this when Edenred tools report AUTH_REQUIRED or AUTH_EXPIRED.' This provides clear usage context. No alternative tools are suggested because the login is a prerequisite for others; thus the guidance is sufficient.

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