Solafon MCP

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. While 'Edit' implies a mutation operation, it doesn't specify permissions required, whether edits are reversible, rate limits, or what happens to the original message. The description is too minimal for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 a single, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it immediately clear despite its brevity.

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 mutation tool with no annotations, 50% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what 'edit' entails (e.g., partial vs. full updates), error conditions, or return values. More context is needed given the tool's complexity.

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 description coverage is 50% (only 'messageId' and 'text' have descriptions). The description mentions 'previously sent bot message' which hints at the 'messageId' parameter, but adds no details about 'type', 'buttons', or their relationships. It doesn't compensate for the coverage gap, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Edit') and resource ('a previously sent bot message'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'delete_message' or 'send_message', but it's specific enough to understand what the tool does.

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 like 'send_message' for new messages or 'delete_message' for removal. There's no mention of prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing bot message) or constraints (e.g., time limits for editing).

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