cdisc-mcp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only operation by using 'List' and 'discover', which is consistent with typical listing behavior, but does not disclose details like pagination, rate limits, or authentication needs. The description adds some context about its role in a workflow but lacks comprehensive behavioral traits.

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 two sentences with zero waste: the first states the purpose, and the second provides usage guidance. It is front-loaded with the core function and efficiently adds context without unnecessary details, making it highly concise 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 the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, output schema exists), the description is complete enough for its purpose. It explains what the tool does and when to use it, which is sufficient for a listing tool. However, without annotations, it could benefit from more behavioral details, but the output schema likely covers return values, reducing the need for further explanation.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately does not discuss parameters, focusing instead on the tool's purpose and usage, which aligns with the baseline for zero 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?

The description clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('CDISC standards and their published versions'), making the purpose specific and unambiguous. It distinguishes from siblings like 'list_ct_packages' or 'search_cdisc' by focusing on standards overview rather than specific content or search.

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 explicitly provides when to use this tool ('Use this first to discover available versions before querying specific content'), offering clear guidance on its role as a discovery step. This helps differentiate it from sibling tools that retrieve detailed content, such as 'get_sdtm_domains' or 'get_codelist'.

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