rpg-mcp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states this is a 'Get' operation, implying read-only behavior, but doesn't disclose any behavioral traits such as authentication needs, rate limits, error conditions, or what happens if the corpse doesn't exist. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 front-loads the core purpose. Every word earns its place, with no redundant information. It's appropriately sized for a simple retrieval tool.

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 complexity (2 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain parameter meanings, return values, error handling, or behavioral constraints. For a tool that likely returns structured corpse data, more context is needed to use it effectively.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for undocumented parameters. It mentions 'corpse' but doesn't explain the 'corpseId' parameter's format or semantics, nor does it mention the optional 'sessionId' parameter at all. The description adds minimal value beyond what's implied by the tool name.

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 tool's purpose: 'Get details about a corpse, including loot and harvestable resources.' It specifies the verb ('Get details') and resource ('corpse'), and mentions what details are included. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_corpse_by_character' or 'get_corpse_inventory', which prevents a perfect score.

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. It doesn't mention sibling tools like 'get_corpse_by_character' or 'get_corpse_inventory', nor does it specify prerequisites or context for usage. The agent must infer usage from the tool name alone.

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