Leapfrog MCP

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

No annotations provided. Description explains data capture source ('XHR/fetch traffic') and classification behavior, adding context beyond the name. However, omits safety profile (read-only/destructive), session requirements, or return value structure.

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?

Three tight sentences with zero waste. Front-loaded with the core action ('List JSON APIs...'), followed by provenance ('Captured automatically...') and classification details. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Moderate completeness for a discovery tool. Covers data source and classification logic well. However, lacks output description (no output schema exists) and omits behavioral safety details that annotations would typically provide.

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 coverage is 33% (only minConfidence described). Description compensates partially by enumerating classification categories matching the 'category' enum, adding semantic meaning. However, fails to explain 'sessionId' context or elaborate on 'minConfidence' beyond schema.

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?

States specific action 'List JSON APIs' and resource scope 'the page has called'. 'XHR/fetch traffic' distinguishes from sibling network_log (which captures all traffic) and api_export (which exports rather than lists).

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 when/when-not guidance or named alternatives. Classification categories provide implicit usage context for the 'category' filter but lacks explicit guidance on choosing this over network_log or api_export.

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