Miyabi MCP Bundle

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 mentions the 'detach' and 'build' options but doesn't describe what 'Start Compose services' actually does (e.g., runs Docker Compose up command, may start containers, requires Docker Compose file). It lacks details on permissions needed, side effects (e.g., container creation), error handling, or output format, leaving significant gaps for a mutation tool.

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 with just two sentences that are front-loaded and waste-free. Every word serves a purpose: the first sentence states the core action, and the second provides key usage tips for parameters, making it efficient and well-structured.

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 that this is a mutation tool (starting services) with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, potential side effects, error conditions, or dependencies (e.g., requires Docker Compose installation). For a tool with 4 parameters and significant behavioral implications, more context is needed.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, so the input schema already documents all four parameters with clear descriptions. The description adds minimal value by briefly mentioning 'detach' and 'build' options but doesn't provide additional semantics beyond what's in the schema (e.g., default behaviors, interactions between parameters). This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 action ('Start Compose services') with specific Docker Compose context, making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'compose_down' or 'compose_ps' beyond the 'start' action, which is why it doesn't achieve a perfect score.

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 some usage context by mentioning 'detach=true for background' and 'build=true to rebuild', which implies when to use certain parameters. However, it doesn't offer explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'docker_start' or other Docker-related tools in the sibling list, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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