Macro recorder

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint=true, so the description need not repeat that. It adds context about actions but does not elaborate on state changes, safety concerns, or what gets 'destroyed' during recording. The schema description for allowUnsafeRecording hints at persistence of secrets, but the description itself could be more explicit about behavioral implications.

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—two sentences that front-load the purpose and actions. Every word is earned; no filler. This is a model of brevity while maintaining clarity.

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?

Despite having 5 parameters and no output schema, the description is very brief and omits important context: the recording lifecycle (start then stop), expected outputs (JSON structure), prerequisites, and failure modes. For a tool with destructive hint and sensitive data concerns, this is incomplete.

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 coverage is only 20% (only allowUnsafeRecording described). The description adds value by listing the four actions and implying that file/name are relevant, but it does not explain each parameter's meaning or usage beyond the schema. The enum for action is mentioned, which helps, but file, name, redactSensitive, and the boolean flags lack sufficient description.

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 verb 'Record' and the resource 'sequence of MCP tool calls to a portable JSON macro file'. It lists the specific actions (start, stop, list, load) and distinguishes from the sibling 'run_macro_script' by mentioning replay is separate.

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 clear context by naming the sibling tool for replay, guiding when to use this tool versus alternatives. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use or any prerequisites, but the actions listed give practical use cues.

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