langfuse-mcp-java

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

CRITICAL: Description claims 'Read-only.' but annotations specify 'readOnlyHint: false' and 'destructiveHint: true'. This is a direct contradiction that could mislead an agent about safety. With destructiveHint true, the description completely misses critical behavioral implications.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action. Every word earns its place, though the final sentence contains false information regarding safety.

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 destructiveHint:true annotation (which suggests dangerous side effects), the description dangerously under-specifies behavior. No output schema exists, yet the description fails to compensate or explain what 'destruction' might occur during a listing operation.

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 100% with clear descriptions for 'page' and 'limit'. The description mentions 'pagination' which contextualizes these parameters, but does not add syntax, format constraints, or valid ranges beyond the schema.

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?

States specific verb (List), resource (prompts in Langfuse project), and scope (all prompts with pagination). However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tool 'get_prompt' which presumably fetches a single prompt.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_prompt' or when pagination is necessary. No mention of required parameters or typical pagination patterns.

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