Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• match_agenciesA
  4.4/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint) already declare safety and variability. The description adds that it is the same logic as the free tool and requires at least one service, but does not disclose result format or pagination. No contradiction.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Two clear sentences plus a concise usage section. Every sentence adds value, no wasted words.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given 7 parameters (100% schema coverage) and no output schema, the description explains purpose and usage well. It covers when to use and the required parameter, but could mention result structure or pagination for completeness.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description mentions the required services and adds context for 'limit' (default 5), but does not significantly enhance parameter meaning beyond the schema.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states it returns a shortlist of agencies based on a buyer brief, using the same logic as the free 'Get Matched' tool. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools 'search_agencies' and 'get_agency'.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines5/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Explicitly provides a 'WHEN TO USE' section with a concrete example and specifies alternatives: use 'search_agencies' for open browsing and 'get_agency' for drilling into results. It also notes the requirement for at least one service.

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

• search_agenciesA
  4.4/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. Description adds context about the tool being a search with filtering and returning a list, which aligns with and slightly enriches the annotation hints. No contradictions.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Description is concise, front-loading the purpose and immediately stating filters and returns. The 'WHEN TO USE' section is clear and separate. No unnecessary words.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  With 7 optional parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's functionality: it returns top matches with specific attributes. It mentions default limit implicitly. Could specify ordering or pagination, but not essential for basic use.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to add much. The description mentions filterable parameters (query, service, country, etc.) but does not deep dive into format or behavior beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Description explicitly states it searches a directory of 47,000+ marketing agencies with specific filters (query, service, country, etc.) and returns top matches with location, rating, reviews, profile link. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying the use case: listing vs recommendation vs detail.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines5/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Provides explicit 'WHEN TO USE' section that contrasts with match_agencies (for recommendations) and get_agency (for full detail). Tells the agent to use this tool for browsing or filtering when the user wants a list to explore.

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

• get_agencyA
  4.9/5.0
  Behavior5/5

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

  Annotations declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. Description adds specific fields returned (description, location, rating, services, website, recent client reviews), covering output behavioral expectations beyond annotations.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Concise paragraph, no redundant sentences. Front-loaded purpose and content, then usage guidance. Efficient and well-structured.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  With no output schema, the description adequately lists returned fields. Single parameter is fully explained. Tool is simple and description covers all necessary context.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description covers slug with example. Description adds 'last path segment of its profile URL' and reiterates to obtain from search, complementing the schema effectively.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Clearly states it fetches a single agency's full profile by slug. Distinguishes from siblings (search_agencies, match_agencies) by specifying it operates on a known slug.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines5/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Explicitly advises when to use: after search/match returned results, or when user names a specific agency. Warns not to guess slugs, directing to search_agencies first.

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