Haloscan MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It implies a read operation ('get') but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, output format, or behavioral traits. The description is too vague to adequately inform the agent beyond basic intent.

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 a single, efficient sentence in French ('Obtenir les domaines expirés.'), which is appropriately sized and front-loaded with no wasted words, earning full marks for conciseness.

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 fails to explain what 'expired domains' entails, how results are returned, or usage context, making it inadequate for a tool with many siblings and potential complexity.

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 one parameter ('keyword') documented as 'Seed keyword'. The description adds no parameter details beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage without compensating 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 'Obtenir les domaines expirés' (Get expired domains) restates the tool name 'get_domains_expired' with minimal elaboration, making it tautological. It specifies the resource (expired domains) but lacks a clear verb beyond 'get' and doesn't differentiate from siblings like 'get_domains_expired_reveal'.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools (e.g., 'get_domains_bulk', 'get_domains_expired_reveal'), the description offers no context, exclusions, or prerequisites, leaving the agent without direction.

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