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 of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool updates an item template, implying mutation, but fails to mention critical details like required permissions, whether changes are reversible, or potential side effects (e.g., affecting existing items). This is a significant gap for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to understand at a glance.

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 mutation tool with 8 parameters, low schema coverage (13%), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavior, parameter meanings, and expected outcomes, making it inadequate for effective tool selection and invocation.

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 low at 13%, with only 'itemId' having a description. The tool description does not add any parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining the purpose of 'properties' or 'sessionId'. Given the low coverage, the description fails to compensate, leaving most parameters undocumented.

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 'Update an existing item template' clearly states the verb ('Update') and resource ('item template'), distinguishing it from tools like 'create_item_template' or 'delete_item'. However, it lacks specificity about what aspects of the item template are updated, making it somewhat vague compared to more detailed descriptions.

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. For example, it doesn't specify if this is for modifying item properties during gameplay or setup, or differentiate it from similar tools like 'update_character' or 'give_item'. The absence of context leaves usage unclear.

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