Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• convert_htmlA
  3.5/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  Description discloses cost (1 credit on success) and return format (embedded resource), which adds value beyond openWorldHint annotation. However, it does not mention any side effects or constraints like HTML size limits or timeout.

  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 sentences with core info: purpose, method (Chromium), optional features, cost, and return type. No wasted 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?

  Given 18 parameters and no output schema, description covers main purpose but does not clarify what 'embedded resource' means (e.g., base64 encoded) or provide additional context for complex layout options.

  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?

  All 18 parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so the description adds minimal extra meaning beyond 'optional CSS and layout options'. Baseline of 3 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?

  Description clearly states it renders HTML to PDF using Chromium, with optional CSS and layout options. This distinguishes it from siblings like convert_file and convert_markdown.

  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 alternatives like convert_file or convert_markdown. The description does not mention when raw HTML input is appropriate.

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

• convert_markdownA
  3.7/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  The description adds that a sensible default stylesheet is applied and costs 1 credit, and returns PDF as an embedded resource. Annotations only provide openWorldHint=true, so description adds useful context but could disclose more behavioral details like error handling.

  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 long, front-loading the action ('Render...PDF') and then adding key details. No redundant information, every word earns its place.

  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?

  Despite 18 parameters and no output schema, the description mentions return format and credit cost. However, it omits important context like error behavior, maximum input size, or support for advanced options like headers/footers. Adequate but with gaps.

  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?

  With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3. The description provides a high-level overview of parameters (CSS, layout options) but does not add meaningful detail beyond what the schema already provides for each parameter.

  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 it 'Render a raw Markdown string to a PDF' – a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like convert_html and convert_file by specifying Markdown as input and PDF as output.

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

  Usage Guidelines3/5

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

  The description implies when to use this tool (when converting Markdown to PDF) and mentions a default stylesheet, but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives (e.g., convert_html for HTML input).

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

• convert_fileA
  3.9/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  The description discloses credit cost, return format (embedded resource), and auto-detection behavior. Annotations include 'openWorldHint: true', which is consistent with credit deduction. No contradictions, but error cases or timeouts are not mentioned.

  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 sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds necessary information without 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?

  With 9 parameters and no output schema, the description explains the main workflow, supported formats, cost, and return type. It omits high-level guidance for optional parameters like page ranges or passwords, but the parameter descriptions cover those.

  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?

  Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining auto-detection and listing supported file types, enriching understanding beyond individual parameter descriptions.

  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?

  The description clearly states 'Convert a file fetched from a public URL into a PDF' with a specific verb and resource. It lists supported file types but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools convert_html and convert_markdown, which are more specific.

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

  Usage Guidelines3/5

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

  The description covers when to use the tool (converting a file from a public URL to PDF) but lacks guidance on when not to use it or how it compares to siblings. No alternatives 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.

• get_accountA
  4.5/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint), description adds that it is free and what is returned, providing useful context.

  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 sentences with no waste, front-loaded with action verb and purpose.

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

  Completeness5/5

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

  For a simple zero-parameter tool with annotations, description covers purpose, usage, and return values adequately.

  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 in schema; description confirms no input needed, meeting the baseline expectation.

  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 the tool checks API key and returns account details, and distinguishes from sibling conversion tools.

  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?

  Explicitly says to use for verifying connection, but no when-not or alternatives are mentioned; siblings are distinct enough.

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