Leapfrog MCP

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden. Adds valuable behavioral context about token reduction and output format (@eN refs). However, fails to disclose safety profile (read-only vs mutation) or whether this modifies page state.

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 efficient sentences with purpose front-loaded. Sentence 2 combines usage timing and parameter scoping; sentence 3 adds selector examples. Slight redundancy between sentences 2 and 3 regarding selector, but overall tight structure with no wasted words.

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?

Tool has medium complexity (3 params, no annotations, no output schema). Description covers core purpose and key parameter usage but leaves gaps: no explicit description of return value structure beyond '@eN refs' hint, and missing behavioral safety disclosure required given zero annotation coverage.

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 has 100% coverage (baseline 3). Description adds significant value for 'selector' parameter: explains purpose (scope to region), benefit (dramatically reduce tokens), and concrete examples ('form', '#results'). Does not address sessionId or maxChars, but schema covers these adequately.

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 ('Re-snapshot') and resource ('current page') and unique output format ('@eN refs'). Distinguishes from siblings by referencing 'act' tool. Slight deduction because 'Re-snapshot' assumes prior context about what snapshots are.

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?

Explicitly states when to use ('after act when you need to re-orient') and provides clear contextual trigger. Names sibling tool 'act' specifically. Lacks explicit 'when not to use' guidance, but usage pattern is clear.

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