Leapfrog MCP

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

Strong disclosure given zero annotations. Explains content filtering ('mutating actions' vs extracts controlled by keepExtracts), transformation logic ('@eN refs resolved to stable selectors'), and output variations. Missing explicit safety declaration (though 'export' implies read-only).

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 dense sentences with zero waste. Front-loaded with purpose ('Export...'), followed by technical specification ('Creates...'), and specific usage instruction ('Use format...'). Every clause 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?

Compensates well for missing output schema by describing the generated script content (JSON, @eN resolution, mutating actions). Covers the 4 parameters adequately. Would benefit from mentioning error cases (invalid sessionId).

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 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3. Description adds significant value: links 'format' parameter to 'execute' tool compatibility, and explains that 'keepExtracts' relates to including non-mutating steps, clarifying the default behavior implied by sentence 2.

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?

Clear verb-object structure ('Export session action history') and specifies the artifact created ('JSON script', 'replayable recording'). Technical details ('@eN refs resolved to stable selectors') precisely define the scope. Minor gap: doesn't explicitly distinguish from sibling 'session_export_trace'.

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?

Provides explicit usage guidance for the 'format' parameter ('Use format='playwright' to get a Playwright JS script compatible with the execute tool'), linking it to a specific sibling tool. However, lacks explicit comparison to 'session_export_trace' for when to use which export format.

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