Sharesight MCP Server

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but only states the basic action. It doesn't cover aspects like pagination, sorting, default behavior, error handling, or whether it's a read-only operation, leaving significant gaps for a tool that likely returns multiple items.

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, direct sentence with no wasted words, making it highly concise and front-loaded. It efficiently communicates the core purpose without unnecessary elaboration.

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 the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is insufficient for a list retrieval tool. It doesn't explain return format, potential limitations, or how results are structured, leaving the agent with incomplete information to use the tool effectively.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'portfolio_id' documented as optional for filtering. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline of 3 without compensating or detracting.

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 clearly states the action ('retrieves') and resource ('list of custom investments'), making the tool's purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_custom_investment' (singular) or 'list_custom_investment_prices', which would require more specificity to earn a 5.

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 such as 'get_custom_investment' for a single item or 'list_custom_investment_prices' for related data. The description lacks context about use cases or exclusions, offering minimal direction.

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