Miyabi MCP Bundle

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. The description 'Get shared context' gives no information about what the tool actually does behaviorally: what 'shared context' is, how it's retrieved, what permissions are needed, whether it's read-only or has side effects, what the return format looks like, or any error conditions. It's completely inadequate for a tool with parameters and no output schema.

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 at just three words. While this represents under-specification rather than ideal conciseness, it's front-loaded and contains zero wasted words. Every word ('Get', 'shared', 'context') contributes to the minimal meaning provided.

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?

The description is completely inadequate given the context. With 2 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, no output schema, and multiple sibling tools that appear related (especially 'context_get' and 'bridge_context_share'), the description fails to provide the necessary context for an agent to understand what this tool does, when to use it, or how its parameters work. It's missing critical information for a tool with parameters and no structured documentation.

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 description provides no information about the two parameters (context_id and society). With 0% schema description coverage and no parameter details in the description, both parameters are completely undocumented. The description doesn't explain what 'society' means (required parameter) or what 'context_id' refers to, nor their relationship or expected formats.

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 'Get shared context' is a tautology that essentially restates the tool name 'bridge_context_get'. While it indicates a retrieval action ('Get') and a resource type ('shared context'), it lacks specificity about what 'shared context' means or what distinguishes this tool from similar tools like 'context_get' or 'bridge_context_share'. The purpose is vague and doesn't differentiate from siblings.

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. There are multiple related tools (e.g., 'bridge_context_share', 'context_get', 'context_list', 'context_search') with no indication of how this tool differs or when it should be preferred. No context, prerequisites, or exclusions are mentioned.

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