CDP MCP Server

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 it 'creates' a role without disclosing behavioral traits. It doesn't mention required permissions, whether the operation is idempotent, what happens on conflicts, or the response format. The JSON format hint for whitelist/blacklist is useful but insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 brief and front-loaded with the core purpose. Both sentences are relevant, though it could be more structured by separating usage instructions from parameter format details.

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 5-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and 0% schema coverage, the description is inadequate. While an output schema exists, the description doesn't address critical context like authentication needs, error conditions, or relationship to other role management tools, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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 0%, so the description must compensate but only addresses whitelist/blacklist parameters. It doesn't explain the purpose of 'name', 'tenant_id', or 'included', nor does it clarify what Permission objects contain or how JSON arrays should be structured. The description adds minimal value beyond the bare 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 ('Create a new role') and specifies the key functionality ('with whitelist/blacklist permissions'), which distinguishes it from generic creation tools. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'cdp_create_user' or 'cdp_update_role' beyond the resource type.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'cdp_update_role' or 'cdp_list_roles'. The description mentions whitelist/blacklist permissions but doesn't explain prerequisites, constraints, or typical use cases for role creation in this system.

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