float-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the tool is for retrieval (not mutation) and mentions pagination and filtering capabilities, but lacks details on permissions required, rate limits, error conditions, or response format. It adds some behavioral context but leaves gaps for a tool with 5 parameters.

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 two sentences with zero waste: the first states the core functionality and filtering, the second provides usage context. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and appropriately sized for a list retrieval tool.

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 tool with 5 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete. It covers purpose and filtering scope but lacks details on authentication needs, error handling, or return structure, which are important for a list tool with multiple filters.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, so parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description adds value by summarizing filtering options ('account type, active status, and department access') and mentioning pagination, but does not provide additional syntax or format details beyond what the schema already specifies.

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 verb 'retrieve' and resource 'paginated list of all user accounts', specifying it's for 'user management, access control, and organizational oversight'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get-account' (singular) and 'update-account' (mutation) by emphasizing list retrieval with filtering.

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 provides clear context for usage ('user management, access control, and organizational oversight') and mentions 'advanced filtering options', but does not explicitly state when NOT to use it or name specific alternatives among the many sibling tools (e.g., 'get-account' for single account retrieval).

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