float-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states basic functionality without behavioral details. It doesn't disclose whether this is a read-only operation, if it requires authentication, rate limits, pagination behavior beyond parameters, or what the output format looks like. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand how to interact with it effectively.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('List all public holidays') and briefly notes key filtering options. There is no wasted verbiage or redundancy, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

Given the complexity (10 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is insufficient. It lacks details on behavioral traits, output format, error handling, or usage context. While the schema covers parameters, the overall tool behavior remains opaque, which could hinder an agent's ability to use it correctly without additional context.

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 description mentions optional filtering by 'date range, region, and status', which aligns with some parameters (e.g., start_date, end_date, region, active). However, with 100% schema description coverage, the schema already fully documents all 10 parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond what's in the schema, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 ('List') and resource ('public holidays') with specific scope ('all'), which is distinct from sibling tools like 'get-public-holiday' (singular retrieval) or 'create-public-holiday' (creation). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other list tools (e.g., 'list-team-holidays'), though the resource specificity is inherent.

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 mentions optional filtering parameters but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't specify if this is the primary tool for holiday queries or if other tools like 'list-team-holidays' serve different purposes. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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