Node Dev MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('List') but doesn't describe what the output looks like (e.g., format, pagination), error conditions, or permissions required. This is a significant gap for a tool with potential complexity in file system operations.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('List files and folders') and adds necessary context ('in the workspace folder or a subfolder'). There is zero waste, and every word earns its place.

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's moderate complexity (file system listing), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose and parameter context, but lacks details on output format, error handling, or behavioral traits that would help an agent use it correctly in varied scenarios.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'name' documented as 'Folder name inside the workspace folder'. The description adds minimal value beyond this, mentioning 'subfolder' which aligns with the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('files and folders'), specifying the scope as 'in the workspace folder or a subfolder'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'search_content' or 'read_file' by focusing on directory listing rather than searching or reading file contents, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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 browsing directory contents, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_content' for finding specific files or 'vcs_status' for version control status. It mentions the workspace folder context, but lacks clear exclusions or prerequisites.

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