mcp_servers_start

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. 'Start an MCP server' implies a state change but does not explain side effects, idempotency, prerequisites (e.g., server must be configured), or what happens if the server is already running.

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 a single, efficiently worded sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. No filler or redundant information is present.

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 simple one-parameter start tool, the description is minimally viable but lacks important context such as where the server name comes from (e.g., from mcp_servers_list), whether the operation is idempotent, or what the return value looks like. Given the tool's simplicity, this is a moderate gap.

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 parameter schema already provides 100% coverage with 'Server name to start' for the 'name' parameter. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Start an MCP server' clearly identifies the verb (start) and resource (MCP server), distinguishing it from sibling tools like stop, restart, and list. However, it does not explicitly differentiate usage from closely related tools such as skill_mcp_start or mcp_servers_restart.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like mcp_servers_start, mcp_servers_restart, or skill_mcp_start. The description only states the action without context or exclusions.

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