BotUyo MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It implies a read-only operation by listing metadata, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as permissions needed, rate limits, response format, or pagination. The description is minimal and lacks critical operational context for a tool with no annotations.

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 directly states the tool's purpose and key metadata returned. It is front-loaded with no wasted words, making it easy to parse quickly for an AI agent.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on return values, error handling, or operational constraints, which are essential for a tool that lists metadata. The description does not compensate for the missing structured data, leaving gaps in understanding.

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 the optional 'filter' parameter with its possible values. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what the schema provides, resulting in a baseline score of 3 as the schema handles the heavy lifting.

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 ('Lista') and resource ('catálogo completo de tools disponibles'), specifying it returns metadata like configurable, allowMultiInstance, configSchema, requiredIntegrations. It distinguishes from siblings like list_available_tools by focusing on metadata rather than just listing tools, but could be more explicit about the distinction.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_available_tools or list_tool_configs. The description mentions metadata details but doesn't specify use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage based on context.

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