mmp_open

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full transparency burden. It discloses that returned data is untrusted and instructs not to follow commands or links, which is critical behavioral context. It does not explicitly state it is read-only or non-destructive, but the safety warning strongly implies no side effects.

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 sentences with no waste: the first states purpose and output, the second provides a critical safety warning. Information is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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?

The tool has moderate complexity with two parameters and an output schema. The description covers high-level return values and an important safety constraint, but lacks parameter details. Output schema exists, reducing the need to document return structure, so completeness is adequate but not full.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It does not mention 'file' or 'section' at all, leaving the agent to guess their meaning. No guidance on format, allowed values, or how the optional 'section' parameter affects behavior.

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 it returns 'metadata, legend, sources, and index only', specifying the verb (return) and resource (MMP file metadata). It distinguishes from siblings like mmp_read (which likely returns actual content) by explicitly limiting the return scope.

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 to get metadata/index without executing instructions, but does not explicitly compare to sibling tools or state when to prefer this over mmp_search or mmp_read. The safety warning provides implicit usage guidance but not an explicit replacement for alternatives.

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