rpg-mcp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'DM view only', hinting at permission requirements, but fails to disclose other behavioral traits such as whether this is a read-only operation, potential rate limits, error handling, or what the output looks like. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that retrieves sensitive data.

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 with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core action and includes a contextual note ('DM view only'), making it appropriately sized and well-structured for quick understanding.

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 of retrieving a secret (a sensitive operation), lack of annotations, 0% schema description coverage, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It misses critical details like authentication needs, response format, and error conditions, making it incomplete for safe and effective use.

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. It mentions 'by ID', which clarifies the purpose of 'secretId', but does not explain the semantics of 'sessionId' or provide any details on parameter formats, constraints, or interactions. This incomplete coverage results in a low score.

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 ('Get') and resource ('a single secret by ID'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_secrets' or 'get_secrets_for_context', which is why it doesn't reach a score of 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?

The description includes 'DM view only', which provides some context about usage restrictions, but it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_secrets' or 'get_secrets_for_context'. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, leaving gaps in usage guidance.

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