MCP GitLab Server

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 'Filtering: By action type, target type, date range' and provides 'Example activities' which give context about what types of events are returned. However, it doesn't disclose important behavioral traits like whether this is a read-only operation, rate limits, authentication requirements, or pagination behavior (though pagination parameters exist in the schema). The description adds some value but leaves gaps for a tool with 7 parameters.

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 well-structured with clear sections ('Returns:', 'Use when:', 'Filtering:', 'Example activities:', 'Related tools:') and uses bullet points effectively. It's appropriately sized at 7 sentences/lines, with each section adding value. However, the 'Related tools' section could be more concise, and some redundancy exists with the schema (e.g., filtering information).

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 moderate complexity (7 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is somewhat complete but has gaps. It explains the purpose, usage context, and provides examples, but lacks information about return format details, error conditions, authentication requirements, and doesn't fully address behavioral transparency. The absence of an output schema means the description should ideally explain what the 'Array of user activities' contains, which it only partially does through examples.

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 schema already documents all 7 parameters thoroughly with descriptions, examples, and constraints. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, mentioning filtering capabilities ('Filtering: By action type, target type, date range') which the schema already covers in detail. The baseline score of 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 tool's purpose with 'Get user's activity feed' and 'Returns: Array of user activities', providing a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('user's activity feed'). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'gitlab_get_user_activity_feed' which appears to serve a similar purpose, though the description implies this tool offers filtering capabilities.

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 includes a 'Use when:' section ('Tracking user contributions, audit trail') that provides clear context for when to use this tool. It also lists 'Related tools' with brief explanations ('Find users', 'Search by user'), offering some guidance on alternatives. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use this tool or compare it directly to similar siblings like 'gitlab_get_user_activity_feed'.

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