BotUyo MCP Server

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states what the tool does, not behavioral traits. It doesn't disclose if this is a read/write operation, permission requirements, side effects, or response format. More context is needed for a mutation tool.

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 in Spanish that front-loads the purpose and key options. Every word contributes to understanding without redundancy.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks information on behavioral aspects, error conditions, and what happens post-selection (e.g., confirmation, agent state change). More detail is needed given the complexity.

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 parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description adds minimal value by mentioning catalog vs. custom options and file formats (.glb/.vrm), but doesn't provide additional semantics beyond the schema's mutual exclusivity note.

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 ('Selecciona' - Select) and resource ('un avatar 3D para un agente'), specifying it can be from a catalog or custom URL. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_avatars' or 'upload_agent_media', but the purpose is well-defined.

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_avatars' (for browsing) or 'upload_agent_media' (for media uploads). The description mentions catalog vs. custom options but doesn't address tool selection context.

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