Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• sellersprite_callB
  3.1/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It only mentions 'logged-in' which hints at authentication requirements, but fails to disclose side effects, rate limits, destructive behavior, or response format. For a generic execution tool, this is insufficient.

  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 wasted words, but it is so concise that it sacrifices important context. It could be expanded without losing efficiency.

  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 that it is a generic execution tool relying on external operation definitions (from sellersprite_list_operations and sellersprite_describe_operation), the description fails to mention these dependencies or how to obtain the required parameters. No output schema is provided, leaving return values ambiguous.

  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 description coverage is 100% for both parameters, so the description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides (operation name and params from sibling tools). The phrase 'using the documented MCP tool input' is vague.

  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 executes a SellerSprite operation, specifying the verb 'execute' and the resource 'SellerSprite operation'. It also notes the requirement of being logged in, but does not differentiate from sibling tools like sellersprite_list_operations or sellersprite_describe_operation.

  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 that the tool should be used when executing an operation after obtaining it from sellersprite_list_operations, but it lacks explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, no exclusions, and no mention of prerequisites like logging in first.

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

• sellersprite_describe_operationB
  3.4/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  With no annotations, the description reveals that the tool returns detailed breakdown (purpose, request, response, etc.), indicating read-only behavior. It does not explicitly state idempotency but the listed output components imply no 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.

  Conciseness4/5

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

  Single sentence that begins with the core purpose, listing key components efficiently. Could be slightly more structured but is clear and concise.

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

  Completeness3/5

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

  Given a single parameter and no output schema, the description adequately outlines what is returned. However, it omits that the operation should come from list_operations, which would help agent ensure validity.

  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 only parameter 'operation' lacks schema description, and the tool description merely says 'one operation' without specifying format or source (e.g., from list_operations). The description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema field 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 clearly states it explains one operation, listing components like purpose and request. It is reasonably distinct from sibling tools which list, call, or check session status, though explicit differentiation is missing.

  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 use before calling an operation, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives or when not to use it. Missing context about prerequisites.

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

• sellersprite_list_operationsB
  3.4/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits like auth requirements or data safety. It only states the operation, lacking any behavioral details beyond listing.

  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?

  Single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's purpose. No unnecessary words.

  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?

  For a list tool with no output schema, the description mentions the output includes purpose and endpoint. Could be more complete by hinting at result format or pagination, but adequate.

  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 100% with parameter descriptions. The tool description adds no extra parameter meaning, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

  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 tool lists available operations with their purpose and endpoint. It distinguishes from siblings like sellersprite_describe_operation (single operation) and sellersprite_call (executes operations).

  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 siblings like describe_operation or call. Usage context is purely implied.

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

• sellersprite_loginB
  3.4/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  The description mentions that credentials stay in the browser, indicating session persistence. However, with no annotations, it should disclose more about default behavior (e.g., what happens on timeout, whether it returns a status, or if it can be called multiple times).

  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 two sentences long with no extraneous information. It front-loads the core action and efficiently includes a key behavioral note about credential persistence.

  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?

  For a login tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential flow: opening browser, waiting, and credential persistence. It could be slightly more explicit about post-sign-in behavior (e.g., does it return immediately or close the browser?), but it is largely sufficient.

  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 schema has 100% description coverage for the single parameter waitSeconds, so the baseline is 3. The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema's own parameter description.

  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 opens SellerSprite in the local default browser and waits for user sign-in. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by being the only login-related tool, though it does not explicitly contrast with them.

  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 or prerequisites. It is implied that login is needed before using other SellerSprite tools, but explicit direction is missing.

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

• sellersprite_session_statusA
  4.3/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  No annotations, so description carries full burden. It transparently states the tool is a read-only check that does not expose credentials. However, it doesn't mention if any state changes occur.

  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?

  Single clear sentence with no wasted words. Front-loaded with action and scope.

  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?

  For a simple status check tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is complete. It covers purpose and a key behavioral trait (no credential exposure).

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

  Parameters4/5

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

  No parameters in input schema, and schema coverage is 100% trivially. Description adds no parameter info but is unnecessary. Baseline score of 4 is appropriate.

  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 tool checks login state of SellerSprite web and extension without exposing credentials. It uses a specific verb-resource pair and distinguishes from siblings like sellersprite_login.

  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 when to use (before other operations), but lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tools. Sibling tools exist but no direct guidance is provided.

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