Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• deepwiki_fetchC
  2.9/5.0
  Behavior2/5

  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 mentions 'enhanced content organization and filtering capabilities' but lacks details on critical behaviors such as rate limits, authentication requirements, error handling, or what 'enhanced' entails. For a tool with 5 parameters and no annotations, this is a significant gap in transparency.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose. It avoids redundancy and waste, though it could be slightly more structured by explicitly separating purpose from capabilities. Overall, it's appropriately concise for the tool's complexity.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the tool's complexity (5 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the return format, error conditions, or how 'enhanced' features work, leaving gaps for the agent. With no output schema and minimal behavioral context, it fails to provide sufficient information for reliable tool invocation.

  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?

  The schema description coverage is 100%, providing detailed descriptions for all parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, mentioning 'filtering capabilities' which loosely relates to parameters like contentFilter and mode, but doesn't elaborate on their semantics or interactions. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles most documentation.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Retrieves') and resource ('GitHub repository documentation from DeepWiki'), and mentions enhanced capabilities. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like deepwiki_search or deepwiki_summarize, which likely have different retrieval or processing approaches.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings (deepwiki_search, deepwiki_summarize). It mentions 'enhanced content organization and filtering capabilities' but doesn't specify what makes it preferable or when alternatives should be considered, leaving the agent without clear usage context.

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

• deepwiki_searchC
  2.9/5.0
  Behavior2/5

  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 describes the search functionality and filtering options but lacks critical behavioral details such as rate limits, authentication requirements, pagination behavior, or what the output looks like (since there's no output schema). This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand how to interact with the tool effectively.

  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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose and key features (searching GitHub repositories with DeepWiki documentation, filtering by language and topics). It's front-loaded with essential information and contains no redundant or unnecessary details.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the complexity of a search tool with 4 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It lacks details on behavioral aspects (e.g., rate limits, auth), output format, error handling, and differentiation from sibling tools. While the schema covers parameters well, the overall context for an agent to use the tool correctly is incomplete.

  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?

  The description mentions filtering by programming language and topics, which aligns with the 'language' and 'topics' parameters in the schema. However, schema description coverage is 100%, meaning all parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, such as hinting at example values, but doesn't provide deeper semantic context or usage examples that aren't already covered.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool searches for GitHub repositories with DeepWiki documentation, specifying the action (search) and resource (repositories). It mentions filtering capabilities (programming language, topics) which adds specificity. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like deepwiki_fetch or deepwiki_summarize, which would be needed for a perfect score.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings (deepwiki_fetch, deepwiki_summarize). It mentions filtering capabilities but doesn't specify scenarios where this search is preferred over alternatives or any prerequisites. Usage context is implied but not explicit.

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

• deepwiki_summarizeB
  3.4/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions AI-powered summarization but does not disclose details like rate limits, authentication needs, output format, or error handling. This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation coverage.

  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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose and key features (AI-powered summaries, focus types). Every word earns its place with no redundancy or unnecessary details.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the complexity of AI-powered summarization, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks information on behavioral traits (e.g., processing time, limitations), output format, and error cases, making it inadequate for a tool with three parameters and no structured support.

  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 schema fully documents parameters like 'url', 'summaryType', and 'maxLength'. The description adds minimal value by mentioning 'different focus types' which aligns with the 'summaryType' enum, but does not provide additional semantics beyond what the schema already covers.

  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 action ('Generates AI-powered summaries'), resource ('GitHub repository documentation'), and scope ('with different focus types'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'deepwiki_fetch' and 'deepwiki_search' which likely retrieve or search documentation rather than summarize it.

  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 summarizing documentation with specific focus types but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'deepwiki_fetch' or 'deepwiki_search', nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions. The context is clear but lacks explicit guidance.

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