codivupload-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but offers none. 'List Posts' doesn't indicate whether this is a read-only operation, whether it requires authentication, what the rate limits might be, or what format the results will be in. For a tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, this leaves the agent with significant uncertainty about the tool's 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?

While technically concise with just two words, this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. The description fails to provide any useful information that would help an AI agent understand or use the tool. Every word should earn its place, but 'List Posts' doesn't provide enough value to justify even its minimal length.

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?

For a tool with 4 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is completely inadequate. It doesn't explain what 'posts' are in this context, what the tool returns, or how to interpret the results. While the schema covers parameter documentation well, the description fails to provide the contextual understanding needed for effective tool use.

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 description provides no parameter information whatsoever, but the input schema has 100% description coverage with clear documentation for all 4 parameters. The schema describes filtering by status and profile_name, plus pagination with limit and offset. Since the schema does the heavy lifting, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate despite the description adding zero value.

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 'List Posts' is a tautology that restates the tool name without adding any meaningful information. It doesn't specify what kind of posts (e.g., social media posts, blog posts) or provide any context about the resource being listed. While it's clear this is a listing operation, it fails to distinguish itself from other list-like tools in the sibling set.

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 provides absolutely no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are multiple other tools in the sibling set that also retrieve posts or related data (getpost, get_agency_media, etc.), but the description offers no differentiation. No context, prerequisites, or exclusions are mentioned.

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