Polish Academic 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 data source (nac.gov.pl) and output format (WordPress REST JSON), which is useful. However, it lacks details on error handling, authentication needs, rate limits, or whether it's a read-only operation (though 'Fetch' implies reading).

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 key information: action, resource, source, and output format. There is no wasted verbiage, 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?

For a simple read operation with one well-documented parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate but minimal. It covers the basics but could benefit from more behavioral context (e.g., error cases, response structure) since annotations are absent.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with 'post_id' well-documented as a numeric ID from specific sources. The description adds context by mentioning the WordPress endpoint ('/wp/v2/posts/{id}'), which clarifies the parameter's role in the API call, providing value beyond the schema.

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 ('Fetch') and resource ('a single blog post from nac.gov.pl'), specifying it returns WordPress REST JSON from a specific endpoint. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'nac_get_page' or 'nac_site_search', but the focus on a single post by ID provides implicit distinction.

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 implies usage by mentioning the source (nac.gov.pl) and endpoint format, and the parameter description suggests 'post_id' comes from 'nac_site_search or URLs'. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'nac_get_page' or 'nac_site_search', leaving some ambiguity.

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