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 mentions 'DM view - shows hidden information,' which hints at permission requirements, but doesn't specify authentication needs, rate limits, pagination, or what 'hidden information' entails. For a read operation with sensitive data, this is insufficient.

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?

Two concise sentences with zero waste. The first states the core purpose, and the second adds critical context about permissions and scope. Every word earns its place.

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 tool with 5 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on authentication, return format, pagination, error handling, and how parameters interact. The 'DM view' hint is useful but insufficient for a tool handling sensitive data.

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 60% (3 of 5 parameters have descriptions). The description adds no parameter-specific details beyond what the schema provides (e.g., it doesn't explain 'worldId' format or 'type' filter options). With moderate schema coverage, the baseline 3 is appropriate as the description doesn't compensate for gaps.

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 ('List all secrets') and resource ('for a world'), with additional context about scope ('DM view - shows hidden information'). It doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_secret' or 'get_secrets_for_context', but the purpose is unambiguous.

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 'get_secret' (for a single secret) or 'get_secrets_for_context' (which might filter differently). The description mentions 'DM view' but doesn't clarify prerequisites or exclusions.

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