Etsy MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states it 'gets' data, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like pagination, rate limits, authentication needs, or what happens if the shop_id is invalid. This leaves significant gaps for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose, 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 tool's simplicity (1 parameter, no output schema) and lack of annotations, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover return values, error handling, or behavioral context, which are essential for effective use. This is inadequate for a tool with no structured data support.

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 'sections of a shop', which aligns with the 'shop_id' parameter in the schema. Since schema description coverage is 100% (the parameter is fully documented), the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, as it doesn't explain parameter usage or constraints further.

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 action ('Get') and resource ('all sections of a shop'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_shop' or 'manage_shop_sections', which would require more specificity for a perfect score.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'get_shop' (which might include sections) and 'manage_shop_sections' (which likely modifies sections), there's no indication of context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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