Server Info

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds specific context by naming the exact information returned (version, data directory, security mode) and specifying the server scope, which helps an agent understand the tool's output beyond what annotations convey.

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 single-sentence description is efficient in stating purpose but omits critical parameter usage. It is front-loaded with the main verb, but the lack of parameter context makes it less effective. Could be improved by briefly noting parameter options.

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?

Given the tool is simple with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description should at minimum indicate that caller and response_format customize the output. It does not address this, leaving a significant gap in understanding how to invoke the tool effectively.

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?

Schema coverage is 0% (no parameter descriptions in schema) yet the description provides no explanation of the two parameters (caller and response_format). Both have enums and defaults, but an agent cannot know their purpose from either the schema or description. Description fails to compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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?

Description clearly states the tool returns runtime information for a specific server ('API-only Cross Review MCP server') and lists the included fields (version, data directory, active security mode). This distinctively separates it from sibling tools which are session-focused.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks context like 'Use this to check server status before performing actions' or any mention of prerequisites or exclusions.

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