lsp-mcp-server

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

Annotations provide idempotentHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, indicating a non-destructive, repeatable operation. The description adds value by specifying 'Manually start,' which implies user-initiated action rather than automatic, and clarifies the target ('language server for a specific workspace'), enhancing context 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.

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

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action and target. It wastes no words and is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity, earning full marks for conciseness.

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 moderate complexity (2 required parameters, no output schema), the description is adequate but minimal. It covers the basic purpose but lacks details on outcomes (e.g., what happens after starting, error conditions) or integration with siblings, leaving some gaps in completeness.

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%, with clear documentation for both parameters. The description doesn't add any additional meaning or examples beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining typical server IDs or workspace root formats, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 ('Manually start') and resource ('a language server for a specific workspace'), making the purpose evident. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'lsp_server_status' or 'lsp_stop_server', which prevents a perfect score.

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 implies usage when manual server initiation is needed, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'lsp_server_status' for checking status or 'lsp_stop_server' for stopping). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, leaving usage context somewhat vague.

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