Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• search_docsA
  3.8/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  With no annotations, the description bears full transparency burden. It describes the return content (API endpoints, guide topics, categories) but does not mention any behavioral traits such as read-only nature, rate limits, authentication needs, or result limitations. It is adequate for a simple search but lacks depth.

  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 concise—two sentences with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core action and immediate outcome, making it efficient for an agent to parse.

  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?

  Given the tool's simplicity (one required parameter, no output schema, no nested objects) and sibling tools, the description covers the essential information. Minor gaps include lack of output format details (e.g., count, ordering), but overall it is sufficiently complete.

  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?

  The schema covers 100% of parameters, including a description for 'keyword' that is similar to the tool description. The tool description does not add significant extra meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline score 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?

  The description clearly states the action ('Search'), the resource ('Handsontable documentation topics by keyword'), and specifies the types of results ('API endpoints, guide topics, and categories'). It effectively distinguishes from siblings: 'get_doc' likely retrieves a single document, and 'list_categories' lists categories, while this tool provides broader search.

  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 usage for general search but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives ('get_doc', 'list_categories'). No 'when to use' or 'when not to use' guidance is provided, leaving the agent to infer context.

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

• get_docA
  3.9/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations provided, so description must disclose all behavioral traits. Only states returns markdown; no info on error handling, authorization, rate limits, or what happens if topic is invalid.

  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 concise sentences front-load the purpose and output format. No superfluous content; every sentence 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?

  Adequate for a simple fetch tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, but lacks details on error cases, return format specifics, and usage examples. Could be more complete.

  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% with descriptions for all parameters. Description adds value by hinting to use search_docs for finding topics, and explains enum defaults and purpose beyond schema.

  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 verb 'Fetch', resource 'Handsontable documentation', and scope 'for a specific topic and framework'. Distinguishes from siblings like search_docs by specifying retrieval of markdown for a known topic.

  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 mentions using search_docs to find available topics within the topic parameter description, providing context for when to use this tool vs searching. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use statements but offers clear guidance.

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

• list_categoriesA
  4.2/5.0
  Behavior3/5

  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 states that the tool lists all categories (no filtering), but does not disclose order, pagination, or any constraints. Minimal insight beyond the basic purpose.

  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 consists of two concise sentences, no wasted words. The first sentence front-loads the action and resource, followed by a usage hint.

  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?

  Given no output schema, the description mentions it returns categories with topics, which is helpful. However, it lacks details like return format or structure, but for a simple list tool it is sufficiently complete.

  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?

  The input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so the description does not need to add parameter details. Baseline 4 is appropriate as no parameters exist to describe.

  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 lists all available documentation categories with their topics, using the specific verb 'list' and resource 'categories with topics'. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_doc (retrieve a specific document) and search_docs (search across docs).

  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?

  The description says 'Useful for browsing the documentation structure,' which gives clear context for when to use it. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, but the sibling tools allow inference.

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