agentdesk-mcp

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 that the tool returns a catalog with 'pricing, quality scores, and capabilities,' but omits behavioral details like pagination, result limits, or whether all parameters are optional (which they are).

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?

Three efficiently structured sentences: action ('List all available services...'), return value ('Returns service catalog...'), and parameters ('Filter by...'). Every sentence earns its place with zero redundancy.

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 catalog listing tool with 100% schema coverage, the description adequately covers the return data structure (pricing, quality scores, capabilities). It could be improved by noting that filtering is optional or mentioning pagination behavior.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description consolidates the four filter parameters ('Filter by category, minimum quality score, maximum price, or capability') but adds no semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides for each individual field.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') with a clear resource ('services on the AgentDesk marketplace'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'execute_service' (which runs services) and 'review_dual/review_output' (which review outputs).

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?

While the filtering capabilities imply browsing behavior, the description lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus 'execute_service' (e.g., 'Use this to find service IDs before execution'). Usage is implied by the verb 'List' but not explicitly stated.

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