Corpus MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but offers none. It omits critical details such as the currency, weight unit (ounce/gram), data source, or whether the price is delayed or real-time.

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 consists of four words with zero redundancy, placing the essential information immediately at the front. Every word earns its place in this highly compact formulation.

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 the tool has no parameters and an output schema exists (reducing the need to describe return values), the description meets minimum requirements. However, it lacks contextual details that would help distinguish it from historical price tools or clarify the data format.

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 input schema contains zero parameters, which establishes a baseline score of 4 according to the evaluation criteria. The description neither adds nor detracts from this empty parameter set.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('live gold price'), making the purpose clear. It implicitly distinguishes from the sibling 'history_of_gold_price' by emphasizing 'live,' though it could further clarify what 'live' means (e.g., current market price).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'history_of_gold_price'. It fails to mention prerequisites, rate limits, or caching considerations that might affect selection.

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