Freesound 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 states 'Download a sound', implying a read operation that retrieves data, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, file format details, or what happens on failure (e.g., invalid ID). The description is minimal and lacks critical operational context.

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 zero waste. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse. Every word earns its place, achieving optimal conciseness for the given information.

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's complexity (download operation with no annotations, 1 parameter at 0% coverage, and no output schema), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on authentication, error handling, output format (e.g., file type), and integration with the sibling tool. For a download tool with minimal structured data, this description leaves significant gaps.

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 'sound ID' as the parameter, adding basic meaning beyond the schema's generic 'soundId' property. However, it doesn't explain what a sound ID is (e.g., numeric identifier from Freesound), valid ranges, or where to obtain it. The description provides minimal semantic value, insufficient for the coverage gap.

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 ('Download') and resource ('a sound from Freesound'), specifying it's identified by 'sound ID'. However, it doesn't differentiate from the sibling tool 'freesound.search', which likely searches for sounds rather than downloading them. The purpose is clear but lacks sibling distinction.

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 prerequisites (e.g., needing a valid sound ID from search results), exclusions, or refer to the sibling tool 'freesound.search' for finding sounds to download. Usage context is implied but not explicit.

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