MCP DeepWiki Server

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.