scm-mcp

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states the action without disclosing critical behavioral traits: it doesn't mention if deletion is permanent/reversible, permission requirements, side effects (e.g., breaking references), or error handling. The phrase 'Delete' implies mutation but lacks depth.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by parameter details in a clear 'Args:' section. It avoids redundancy and is appropriately sized for a simple delete operation, though the formatting could be slightly more polished.

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 destructive mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete: it lacks information on return values, error cases, confirmation prompts, or impact on related objects. Sibling tools suggest a complex SCM system, requiring more contextual guidance.

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 0%, but the description compensates by explaining both parameters: address_id as 'UUID of the address object to delete' and tsg_id as 'Optional TSG ID or named alias' with a default. This adds meaningful context beyond the bare schema.

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 specific action ('Delete') and resource ('an address object by UUID'), distinguishing it from siblings like scm_create_address, scm_update_address, and scm_get_address. It precisely defines the operation without ambiguity.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., scm_update_address for modification, scm_list_addresses for viewing). It mentions a default for tsg_id but lacks context on prerequisites, dependencies, or error conditions.

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