mcp-compress

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses input requirements ('Requires...') but omits critical behavioral details: what the tool returns (decompressed data), error handling behavior, or whether the operation is idempotent/safe.

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, zero fluff. Front-loaded with the action verb. Every word earns its place.

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?

Adequate for a 2-parameter tool with complete input schema coverage, but lacking given no output schema exists. Should mention that successful execution returns the decompressed/raw data to fully complete the contract.

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%, establishing a baseline of 3. The description restates parameter requirements ('Requires the base64 compressed data and the algorithm') but adds no semantic depth beyond the schema definitions (e.g., no usage examples, format constraints, or relationship between parameters).

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?

Clear verb ('Decompress') and resource ('previously compressed data'). The phrase 'previously compressed' implicitly positions it as the inverse operation of the 'compress' sibling, though it doesn't explicitly name the sibling or contrast use cases.

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?

States what inputs are required but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'compress' or 'analyze'), nor prerequisites beyond the parameter types.

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