Retrieve conversation statuses from the LibreDesk support API to view available status labels and organize or filter support conversations.
Get Conversation Statuses GET /api/v1/statuses Tags: Status and priority
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description must disclose behavior. It only indicates 'Get' (read-only) but fails to mention side effects, rate limits, or return format, leaving significant gaps.
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 very short but includes extraneous URL and tags. It could be more concise by focusing only on the operation, e.g., 'Get Conversation Statuses'.
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 simple retrieval tool with no output schema, the description should at least hint at what is returned (e.g., list of status objects). It also fails to differentiate from 'get_priorities', leaving the agent underinformed.
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?
The input schema has no parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no value beyond the schema, but given zero parameters, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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 'Get Conversation Statuses', identifying the verb and resource. However, it lacks differentiation from sibling tools like 'get_priorities', which may reduce clarity for the agent.
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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_priorities' or any prerequisites.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.