Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• platform_searchC
  2.4/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  The description does not disclose behavioral traits beyond the basic action. With no annotations, it fails to mention that the tool likely requires an active session, may scroll (implied by scrollTimes), or returns a list. It adds no value over the tool name.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness3/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is very short (one sentence), which is concise but at the expense of necessary detail. It is not verbose, but it omits critical information, so a 3 reflects adequate conciseness with insufficient content.

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

  Completeness1/5

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

  For a tool with five parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain parameter roles, prerequisites (session), or return format, making it insufficient for correct invocation.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters1/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no meaning to the five parameters. The agent cannot infer what sessionId, maxNotes, scrollTimes, or site do from the description alone, which is insufficient.

  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 a verb ('search') and resource ('site' and 'notes'), making the tool's purpose understandable. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like xhs_open_and_extract, which could also retrieve notes. A 4 is appropriate as it is clear but lacks differentiation.

  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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not mention that a session must be created first via create_session, nor that xhs_open_and_extract might be used for single-note extraction. This omission leaves the agent uncertain about context.

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

• create_sessionC
  2.7/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations provided, so description must bear full weight. Only mentions return values but omits behavioral traits like browser launch, authentication needs, or side effects.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness3/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  A single sentence is efficient but too sparse for a session creation tool. Lacks structure to convey essential details while remaining concise.

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

  Completeness2/5

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

  Given one parameter, no annotations, and no output schema, the description fails to explain parameter semantics, return value structure, or when to use. Incomplete for effective agent usage.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters1/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Single parameter 'site' with type string and no description. Schema coverage is 0%, and the description provides no clarification on what 'site' means (e.g., URL, domain, name).

  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 ('Create a new browser session') and the return values ('sessionId + viewUrl'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like destroy_session and platform_search.

  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 vs alternatives. Lacks prerequisites or context, such as requiring a valid site parameter or network connectivity.

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

• destroy_sessionC
  2.7/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only implies irreversibility through 'Destroy'. It fails to disclose side effects, required permissions, or what exactly happens to the session.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness3/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  At 4 words, it is maximally concise, but the trade-off is insufficient context. The sentence is front-loaded but lacks necessary detail.

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

  Completeness2/5

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

  Despite low complexity (1 parameter, no output schema), the description omits critical behavioral details and parameter semantics, making it inadequate for reliable agent invocation.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters1/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The schema has 0% description coverage for the single parameter (sessionId). The description adds no meaning, leaving the agent to guess the parameter's purpose or source.

  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 ('Destroy') and the resource ('a browser session'), distinctly differentiating it from sibling tools like create_session.

  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?

  The description provides no guidance on when or when not to use this tool, nor does it mention any prerequisites or alternatives. The agent receives no context for decision-making.

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

• wait_for_loginC
  2.8/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description must reveal behavioral traits. It only states 'poll login status' without explaining whether the call blocks, times out, or returns immediately. Key behaviors like polling frequency, error handling, and status values are absent.

  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 single-sentence description is highly concise and contains no filler. Every word contributes to the purpose.

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

  Completeness2/5

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

  Despite the tool's apparent simplicity, the description omits critical context: return type, blocking nature, error states, and relationship to session lifecycle. With no output schema, the agent lacks information to handle the tool's response properly.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters2/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 0% and the description barely explains parameters. It hints at the optional site parameter but fails to describe sessionId (required) or timeoutSec (optional). Consequently, the description adds little value over the raw schema.

  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 the tool polls login status for a session and notes site-specific behavior. It is distinct from sibling tools like create_session and destroy_session which handle session lifecycle, though sibling differentiation is not explicit.

  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?

  The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_session or platform_search. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., session must exist) or when polling is appropriate.

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

• xhs_open_and_extractC
  2.8/5.0
  Behavior1/5

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

  No annotations provided, and the description fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as destructive potential, authentication needs, rate limits, or error behavior. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a critical gap.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single sentence with no fluff, but it could include more useful detail without becoming verbose. It is appropriately concise but not maximally informative.

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

  Completeness1/5

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

  Given the tool has 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is far too brief. It does not explain return values, error handling, or prerequisites for opening a note, leaving agents underinformed.

  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?

  Schema coverage is 0% (no parameter descriptions), but parameter names (sessionId, url, site) are self-explanatory. The description adds 'site-specific' hint but does not elaborate on the optional 'site' parameter or its values.

  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 ('Open a note and extract full detail') and the resource ('note'), with 'site-specific' hinting at context. This uniquely identifies the tool's purpose among siblings like create_session, destroy_session, platform_search, and wait_for_login.

  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 vs alternatives, no prerequisites or exclusions. The description only states what it does, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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