RSS3 MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Retrieve' implies a read-only operation, but it doesn't specify whether this requires authentication, has rate limits, returns structured data, or handles errors. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency about how it behaves.

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 ('Retrieve epoch by id') with no wasted words, making it easy to parse. It's front-loaded with the core action, though it could benefit from more context without sacrificing brevity.

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 complexity implied by sibling tools and the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what an 'epoch' is, what data is returned, or how errors are handled, leaving the agent with insufficient context to use the tool effectively in this ecosystem.

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 0 parameters with 100% description coverage, so no parameters need documentation. The description doesn't add parameter details, but that's unnecessary here. A baseline of 4 is appropriate as the schema fully covers the parameter semantics by indicating none are required.

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 'Retrieve epoch by id' clearly states the verb ('retrieve') and resource ('epoch'), making the basic purpose understandable. However, it lacks specificity about what an 'epoch' represents in this context and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'API-getAllEpochs' or 'API-getEpochAPYSnapshots', leaving room for ambiguity about when to use this versus other epoch-related tools.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With multiple sibling tools related to epochs (e.g., 'API-getAllEpochs', 'API-getEpochAPYSnapshots'), there is no indication of context, prerequisites, or distinctions, leaving the agent to guess based on tool names alone.

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