MCP Framework Documentation Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the tool returns a ranked list with excerpts, which is useful behavioral context. However, it lacks details on permissions, rate limits, error handling, or pagination, leaving gaps for a search tool.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and efficiently adds return value details. Every sentence earns its place with zero waste, making it appropriately sized and well-structured.

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 (search with filtering), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is mostly complete but could improve by explaining the return format more (e.g., structure of results). It covers purpose and basic behavior adequately but lacks some operational details.

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%, so the schema fully documents all parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides (e.g., it doesn't explain 'section' filtering nuances or 'limit' defaults beyond the schema). Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('documentation'), and distinguishes it from sibling tools by specifying it returns ranked results with excerpts, unlike 'get_page' (likely retrieves a single page) and 'list_sections' (likely lists sections without search).

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 for keyword/phrase-based searches, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_page' or 'list_sections', or any exclusions (e.g., when not to use it).

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