Corpus MCP Server

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. States 'Get' implying read-only access but does not confirm idempotency, safety (no side effects), rate limits, or error conditions (e.g., unauthenticated). Fails to disclose what 'settings' encompasses or whether this triggers any server-side events.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with action verb. Efficient construction with no redundant words, though 'and settings' is slightly vague without elaboration in the schema.

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?

Adequate for a zero-parameter read operation where output schema exists to define the return structure. However, given absent annotations and the financial domain context, it should clarify whether this retrieves account preferences vs application configuration.

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?

Zero parameters present. With no parameters requiring semantic explanation, this meets the baseline expectation.

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?

Uses specific verb 'Get' and identifies resource 'current user's profile and settings' clearly. Distinguishes from financial siblings (get_portfolio_summary, etc.) by specifying 'profile' rather than portfolio data, though could explicitly contrast with financial tools to be a 5.

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?

Provides no explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives, prerequisites, or conditions. While the name makes usage somewhat obvious, there is no mention of authentication requirements or when to prefer this over other user-related operations.

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