codivupload-mcp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states 'Get' implying a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, error handling, or what happens if the ID is invalid. For a tool with no annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its 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 extremely concise ('Get Playlist Details') with zero wasted words, making it front-loaded and easy to parse. However, it's arguably too brief, bordering on under-specified, which slightly reduces its effectiveness.

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, no output schema, and a simple input schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'details' are returned, error conditions, or how it differs from sibling tools. For a tool that likely returns structured data, more context is needed to be fully helpful.

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%, with the single parameter 'id' documented as 'The UUID of the playlist'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond this, as it doesn't explain parameter usage or constraints. Baseline is 3 since the schema adequately covers the parameter.

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 'Get Playlist Details' clearly indicates a read operation on playlists, but it's vague about scope and doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like 'get_agency_playlists' (plural) or 'get_integrations_youtube_playlists'. It states what it does but lacks specificity about what 'details' includes or the resource context.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_agency_playlists' (which likely lists multiple playlists) or 'get_integrations_youtube_playlists'. The description implies usage for retrieving details of a specific playlist but doesn't specify prerequisites or exclusions.

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