Get MCP server

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the returned data fields but does not disclose not-found/error behavior, rate limits, or authorization requirements. Because an output schema exists, the return list is not a major behavioral addition.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and followed by a compact return summary. No filler, and the second sentence is a useful payload preview rather than restating the name.

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 single-record lookup with full schema coverage, annotations, and an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and data scope. Error handling is absent, but given the structured fields and low complexity, nothing critical is missing for correct 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 coverage is 100% for the single slug parameter, and the description's 'by its directory slug' matches the schema without adding format, casing, or validation semantics beyond what is already documented. Baseline 3 applies when the schema carries parameter documentation.

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 states a specific verb and resource: look up one MCP server by directory slug. The focus on 'one' by slug distinguishes it from the sibling search_mcp_servers, which implies query-based discovery. An agent can select this tool for known-slug retrieval without opening the schema.

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?

It implies the precondition that the caller already has a directory slug, but it does not explicitly say when to use this tool instead of search_mcp_servers or what to do if the slug is unknown. No exclusions or alternative routing are stated.

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