mcp-compress

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It successfully discloses the decompression behavior, but omits critical operational details: error handling for missing keys, output format (since no output schema exists), rate limits, or whether retrieval is destructive vs. read-only.

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?

Single sentence, appropriately front-loaded with the primary action verbs. Zero redundancy or filler. The brevity is appropriate for the tool's simplicity (one parameter, straightforward operation).

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 absence of annotations and output schema, the description provides the bare minimum by mentioning the decompress operation. However, it lacks essential context for a retrieval tool: failure modes (key not found), return value structure, or whether the data remains stored after retrieval.

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 mentions 'by key' which aligns with the parameter, but adds no additional semantic information about the key format, valid key patterns, or lookup behavior beyond what the schema already provides.

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 specifies two distinct actions ('Retrieve and decompress') and identifies the target resource ('previously stored data by key'). The phrase 'previously stored' effectively distinguishes this from the sibling `decompress` tool (which likely handles raw compressed data) and implies the retrieval counterpart to `store`, though it could more explicitly reference the storage lifecycle.

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 explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus siblings like `decompress` or `analyze`, nor does it state prerequisites (e.g., that a `store` operation must have occurred first). While 'previously stored data' implies usage context, it lacks explicit when/when-not directives.

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