Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• divideC
  2.4/5.0
  Behavior1/5

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

  With no annotations, the description carries full burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely states 'divide two numbers' but does not address critical behaviors such as division by zero, error handling, or whether the result is a float or integer. No extra context is provided.

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

  Conciseness2/5

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

  The description is not verbose, but it is under-specified. It is too sparse to be considered well-structured for a tool with potential edge cases, making it less about conciseness and more about missing critical information.

  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?

  The tool is simple, but the description fails to cover important aspects like division by zero behavior or result type. Even though an output schema exists, it cannot clarify runtime errors or edge cases, leaving the description incomplete for practical use.

  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 does not compensate. It only says 'two numbers' without elaborating on the meaning of parameters a and b, their types, or constraints, adding no value beyond the parameter names and types already in the 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 uses specific verb 'Divide' and resource 'two numbers', clearly distinguishing from sibling tools add, subtract, and multiply.

  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 mention of when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, exclusions, or context. The description provides no usage guidance beyond the basic operation.

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

• trigger_n8n_workflowC
  2.5/5.0
  Behavior1/5

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

  With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Trigger an n8n workflow' implies an external side effect, but the description omits any information about authentication, asynchronous behavior, rate limits, or potential impact.

  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, short sentence with no redundant words, making it easy to scan. It is under-specified overall, but no words are wasted.

  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?

  The tool is simple with one parameter, but as an external workflow trigger it lacks essential context about side effects and expected behavior. The output schema may cover return values, but description-level completeness is insufficient.

  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 only repeats that a 'prompt' is used without adding format, length limits, or examples. It adds minimal value beyond the schema's bare parameter name.

  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 uses a specific verb ('Trigger') and resource ('n8n workflow'), clearly indicating the action. It differs sharply from sibling tools (add, subtract, multiply, divide), making the intended operation unambiguous, though it does not specify which n8n workflow.

  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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling tools are clearly arithmetic, so use is implied, but the description does not state prerequisites, context, or exclusion criteria.

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

• subtractA
  3.5/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  With no annotations provided, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It implies a pure function with no side effects, but it does not explicitly state the order of operands (a-b vs b-a) or behavior on errors/edge cases. For a trivial arithmetic operation, this is acceptable but not fully transparent.

  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 a single concise sentence with no fluff. It is front-loaded and every word earns its place, making it highly efficient.

  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 simplicity of the tool and the presence of an output schema, the description is mostly complete for a basic arithmetic operation. However, it lacks any usage context and does not explicitly state the operand order, so it is not a 5.

  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?

  The schema has no descriptions for parameters, so the description must compensate. It only says 'two numbers', which adds little beyond the schema's integer types. It does not clarify that 'a' is the minuend and 'b' the subtrahend, leaving potential ambiguity in the order of subtraction.

  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 'Subtract two numbers' clearly states the action (subtract) and the resource (two numbers), and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools (add, multiply, divide) by naming the specific operation. It is a specific verb+resource statement.

  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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any conditions, prerequisites, or scenarios appropriate for subtraction, nor does it reference sibling tools like 'add' or 'multiply'.

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

• multiplyA
  3.9/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  There are no annotations, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the core operation but does not explicitly mention the return value or any edge cases, though the behavior is largely self-evident for a simple multiply operation.

  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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is concise and immediately understandable.

  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?

  Given the simplicity of the tool and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete enough. It states the operation clearly, and the parameter schema defines the inputs sufficiently.

  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 input schema has no parameter descriptions and 0% schema coverage. The description adds that the operation involves 'two numbers', which adequately covers the symmetric parameters a and b, but it doesn't provide per-parameter detail beyond that.

  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 operation with a specific verb ('Multiply') and resource ('two numbers'). It is immediately distinct from sibling tools like add, subtract, and divide.

  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 multiplication but provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over the alternatives. There are no exclusions or alternative recommendations.

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

• addA
  4.4/5.0
  Behavior5/5

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

  The description is a pure function with no side effects, and the sole behavior 'Add two numbers' is fully disclosed. With no annotations to contradict, the description provides complete behavioral transparency for this simple operation.

  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 a single sentence with no unnecessary words; it is front-loaded and earns its place. It communicates everything needed in the most compact form possible.

  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?

  Given the tool's simple nature and the presence of an output schema (per context signal), the description sufficiently covers the function. There are no complex behaviors, side effects, or conditional logic to document.

  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 description coverage is 0%, yet the description only generically mentions 'two numbers' without explaining the meaning or constraints of parameters a and b. It does not compensate for the lack of schema descriptions, leaving parameter semantics under-specified.

  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 uses the specific verb 'Add' and identifies the resource as 'two numbers', clearly distinguishing it from the sibling arithmetic tools subtract, multiply, and divide. It is unambiguous and precisely states the tool's function.

  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 is concise but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives; however, the operation is self-evident for the sibling context. It lacks explicit exclusions or alternative guidance, but the clear context of adding numbers implicitly covers the main use case.

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