Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• list_itemsA
  3.8/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does add useful details: lists only immediate children, supports an optional template filter, and specifies the returned fields (id, name, path, template name, display name). However, it omits other behavioral aspects such as sorting, pagination, error behavior when parentId is invalid, or language handling. It provides some transparency but not comprehensive.

  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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose ('List the immediate children'). Every clause adds value: the scope ('immediate'), the optional filter, and the return fields. No fluff or redundant repetition of the title or tool name.

  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 moderate complexity, full schema coverage, and absence of an output schema, the description is mostly complete. It explains the purpose, the key behavior (immediate children, optional filter), and the return fields. However, it does not mention the language parameter's role or any edge cases, and the sibling tool relationship is not addressed. Still, it provides a solid understanding for an agent to select and use the tool correctly.

  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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds little beyond the schema: it mentions 'immediate children' and optional template filter, both of which are already captured in the parameter descriptions. It does not add new meaning about the language parameter or parameter relationships. The schema fully documents the parameters, so the description does not need to compensate.

  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 verb 'List' and the resource 'immediate children of a Sitecore / XM Cloud item', which is specific and distinguishes it from the sibling tool get_item_detail that retrieves a single item. It also mentions optional filtering by template ID and the returned fields, making the purpose unmistakable.

  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 listing immediate children, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus the sibling get_item_detail, nor does it give guidance on when not to use it. The optional template filter is mentioned, but no contextual triggers or exclusions are provided. The usage is clear by implication but not explicitly framed against alternatives.

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

• get_item_detailA
  4/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It lists the return fields (id, name, path, template name, display name, field names/values, children count), giving a clear expectation of what the tool returns. It does not mention error behavior or permissions, but for a fetch operation this is likely sufficient.

  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 that front-loads the action and resource, followed by a colon and list of returned details. No wasted 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?

  The tool is simple: one required parameter (itemId), with optional version and language documented in the schema. The description explains the return values thoroughly, and the sibling tool list_items covers the list scenario. The absence of an output schema is compensated by the detailed field list. Complete enough.

  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?

  All three parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so baseline is 3. The description does not add additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

  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 a specific verb 'Fetch' and clearly identifies the resource as a single Sitecore item, listing the fields returned. This distinguishes it from the sibling tool list_items, which likely retrieves multiple items.

  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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool over list_items. However, the phrase 'single item' implies this is for fetching one item's details, while list_items presumably retrieves multiple. No exclusion or alternative is mentioned, so guidance is only implied.

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