help

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

The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations. While annotations indicate read-only, non-destructive, and closed-world operation, the description clarifies this is a guide/show operation with no data manipulation. It doesn't contradict annotations but provides helpful context about what the tool actually returns (a guide with examples).

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 perfectly concise with two sentences that each serve distinct purposes: the first states what the tool does, the second provides usage guidance. There is zero wasted language or redundancy.

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 parameterless, read-only guide tool with no output schema, the description is complete. It explains what the tool provides (a guide with all tools and examples) and when to use it. Given the tool's simple nature and the annotations covering safety aspects, no additional information is needed.

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?

With 0 parameters and 100% schema coverage, the baseline would be 4. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters since none exist, and instead focuses on what the tool does, which is correct for a parameterless tool.

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: 'Show the imessage-mcp guide: all 26 tools and usage examples.' It specifies the exact resource (guide) and verb (show), and distinguishes itself from siblings by being a meta-tool for discovery rather than data retrieval or analysis.

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 states when to use this tool: 'Call this when you're unsure what's available.' This provides clear guidance on the specific context for usage versus the 25 sibling tools that perform actual operations on iMessage data.

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