Osmosis MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states 'admin only' for permissions. It fails to disclose critical behavioral traits: whether this is a write operation (implied by 'Set'), potential side effects, transaction confirmation details, error handling, or rate limits. This leaves significant gaps for a tool with 6 parameters and no output schema.

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 extremely concise with a single sentence that front-loads the core purpose. Every word earns its place with no wasted text, making it easy to parse quickly despite its brevity.

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 (6 parameters, admin requirement, no output schema) and lack of annotations, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what a 'before send hook' does, what happens after setting it, return values, or error conditions. The minimal information provided is insufficient for proper 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 100%, providing detailed parameter documentation. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, such as explaining relationships between parameters or usage examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('Set') and the resource ('a before send hook for a token'), making the purpose understandable. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying 'admin only', but doesn't explicitly differentiate from other admin tools like 'set-pool-weights' or 'set-token-metadata' beyond the hook-specific function.

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 minimal guidance with 'admin only', indicating a permission requirement, but offers no context on when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites, or typical scenarios. It lacks explicit when/when-not statements or named alternatives among the many sibling tools.

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