help_tool

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It goes beyond a generic 'help' promise by specifying exactly what the returned help includes: parameters, types, defaults, and description. It does not mention error behavior for unknown tool names, but for a simple read-only lookup that is a minor omission.

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?

One well-structured sentence containing only essential information. It front-loads the action and resource, then lists the delivered content. No filler or repetition.

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?

For a simple one-parameter, no-output-schema meta tool, the description covers the parameter and the expected returned content. It is slightly incomplete in that it does not mention how unknown tools are handled or whether help includes examples, but these are edge cases for a straightforward lookup tool.

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 fully documents the single required parameter with a clear description ('Tool name to get help for'). The description reinforces this by saying 'specific MCP tool,' but adds no extra meaning or constraints beyond what the schema already provides.

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 ('Get'), the resource ('detailed help for a specific MCP tool'), and the expected content ('parameters, types, defaults, description'). The word 'specific' distinguishes it from list_tools, which presumably enumerates tools rather than providing per-tool help.

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?

Usage is implied: if you need details about one existing MCP tool, this is the tool to call. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use list_tools instead, nor does it state that this tool is for looking up tool schemas rather than executing or managing tools.

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