MCP tool index

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 accurately states the action but does not explicitly mention that the operation is read-only or that it returns a catalog of tools. Given the simple nature, there is no misleading information, but additional context would improve transparency.

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 concise sentence that is front-loaded and information-dense. Every word adds value, and there is no wasted text.

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?

This is a simple, parameterless tool with an output schema present. The description fully covers what the tool does, and the output schema handles return-value details. There are no missing behavioral or usage aspects that need further explanation.

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, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters but could hint at the output structure. The mention of 'with a short description' adds some context about what the returned list will contain.

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 uses a specific verb ('list') and resource ('every available OBS MCP tool') and adds detail about the output ('with a short description'). It clearly distinguishes the tool from the many specific sibling tools that operate on individual OBS features.

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 implies usage for tool discovery without explicitly stating when to use it over alternatives. Since it lists all tools with descriptions, the intended use case is clear, but there is no direct statement like 'use when you need an overview of available tools'.

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