CData Sync MCP Server

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 effectively discloses behavioral traits: it's a destructive operation (deletion), requires admin permissions (from 'Access denied' error), and notes that some logs may be protected. The 'RETURNS' and 'COMMON ERRORS' sections add valuable context beyond basic functionality.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded, starting with the core purpose, followed by returns and errors. Each section (purpose, returns, errors) is concise and adds value without redundancy, making it easy to scan and understand.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description provides good context: it explains the tool's purpose, return value, and common errors. However, it could be more complete by detailing prerequisites (e.g., workspace setup) or behavioral nuances like batch deletion support, but it covers key aspects adequately for a deletion tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters well. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema, such as explaining parameter interactions or usage nuances. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles the heavy lifting.

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 tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('API request log entries'), including the reasons ('for privacy compliance or cleanup'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'read_requests' by focusing on deletion rather than reading.

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 for privacy compliance or cleanup, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like other 'write_' tools or specify exclusions, such as when logs are protected (mentioned only in errors).

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