Polish Academic MCP

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the return format (Dublin Core metadata with specific fields) and the UUID source, but doesn't mention error handling, rate limits, authentication needs, or whether this is a read-only operation (though implied by 'Retrieve').

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?

Two sentences with zero waste. First sentence states purpose and parameter, second describes return values. Every element earns its place with no redundancy.

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 single-parameter read operation with no output schema, the description provides good coverage: purpose, parameter context, and return format. However, it lacks error scenarios or behavioral constraints that would be helpful given no annotations.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the UUID parameter. The description adds value by explaining where to find the UUID ('uuid' field of agh_search results) and providing context about its purpose, but doesn't add syntax details beyond what the schema provides.

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 'full metadata for a single item in the AGH University of Krakow Repository', specifying it's by UUID. It distinguishes from sibling 'agh_search' by focusing on single-item retrieval rather than search.

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: use when you have a UUID from 'agh_search results'. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use this tool or name alternatives beyond the implied 'agh_search' for finding UUIDs.

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