Connect to Origin/OriginPro and retrieve basic status, verifying the software is accessible for automated operations.
Connect to Origin/OriginPro and report basic status.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| show | No | Whether Origin should be visible after connecting or querying capabilities. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description must cover behaviors. It mentions connecting and reporting status, but does not specify what status includes or side effects (e.g., making Origin visible via 'show' parameter). Adequate but not detailed.
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?
One efficient sentence with no wasted words, but could be slightly more informative without becoming verbose.
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 simple tool, full schema coverage, and existence of an output schema, the description is largely complete. Only missing details about the status report format.
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 100%, and the tool description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema's parameter description. Baseline of 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 tool connects to Origin/OriginPro and reports basic status, which is a distinct purpose from sibling tools that perform specific operations like task management or plotting.
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?
No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, but the purpose is straightforward and implies use for connectivity checks before other operations.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.