DevDocs MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes what the tool returns (which technologies have cached indexes and page counts) but doesn't disclose behavioral aspects like whether it requires authentication, has rate limits, or how current the cache status information is. The description adds basic context but lacks operational details.

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 perfectly concise with three sentences that each earn their place: first states the core function, second specifies what information is returned, third provides usage context. No wasted words and front-loaded with the main purpose.

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?

For a zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description provides good completeness: it explains what the tool does, what information it returns, and when to use it. However, without annotations or output schema, it could benefit from more detail about the return format (e.g., structured data vs plain text) to reach full completeness.

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 tool has zero parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters since none exist, and it focuses on what the tool returns instead.

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 tool's purpose with specific verbs ('Muestra qué documentaciones están disponibles offline') and resources ('documentaciones', 'tecnologías', 'páginas'). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on cached/offline status rather than searching, listing, or manipulating documentation content.

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?

The description explicitly states when to use this tool: 'Útil para saber qué documentación puedes consultar sin conexión a internet.' This provides clear context about using it to determine offline availability, distinguishing it from siblings that perform operations like clearing cache, exporting, or searching documentation.

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