axint.activate

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

The description states 'read-only built-in compiler smoke test; writes no files and uses no network.' These details align perfectly with annotations (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true) and add specific behavioral assurances beyond what annotations provide.

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 consists of two efficient sentences. The first immediately states the core purpose, and the second provides usage guidance and behavioral effects. No extraneous information, and the most important points are front-loaded.

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 low complexity (1 optional parameter, full annotations, output schema present), the description covers purpose, usage, and behavioral traits adequately. It does not detail the output schema, but that is provided separately. Slight room for improvement: mentioning that output schema exists or example output, but not necessary.

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 single optional parameter 'format' is fully documented in the schema with enum and description. The description does not add any additional meaning about this parameter. With 100% schema coverage, 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 'Run a source-free compiler smoke test through the real Axint pipeline', specifying the verb (Run) and resource (smoke test). It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on a post-installation/connection test, which is not offered by other siblings.

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 instructs 'Use immediately after installing or connecting Axint so the current agent proves it did more than start the MCP server.' This provides clear usage context. However, it does not mention when to avoid using this tool or suggest alternatives among siblings.

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