Retrieve abilities from a Kanka campaign by providing its campaign ID. Supports pagination to browse powers, traits, or skills stored in your worldbuilding data.
List abilities
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | ||
| campaignId | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.1.1Does 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 'List abilities' is tautological. It does not state that this is a read-only operation, that results are scoped by campaign, that pagination is available via page, or what the response shape will be.
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 extremely short, but it simply restates the tool name and provides no useful elaboration. This is under-specification, not effective 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?
The tool is simple, but the description is still inadequate. It omits the meaning of the required campaignId parameter, the pagination behavior, and any distinction from the many sibling list_* tools. An agent cannot reliably invoke this tool correctly based on the description alone.
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 0%, and the description adds no meaning to the parameters. The agent is left to guess the semantic role of campaignId and page, despite campaignId being required.
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 states a clear verb and resource: 'List abilities.' This distinguishes it from get_ability, create_ability, update_ability, and delete_ability. However, it does not mention any scope or filter, such as campaign-specific listing, so it does not fully differentiate from the other list_* tools.
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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_ability or other list_* tools. The required campaignId parameter is not described, so an agent cannot infer the intended usage context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.