CDP 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 mentions 'Admin-only' (permission requirement) and that it's an override operation, but doesn't disclose critical behavioral traits like whether this is a destructive/mutative action, what the override payload structure should be, rate limits, or what happens to the original request. The description is insufficient for a mutation tool with zero 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 extremely concise with only two sentences that each serve distinct purposes: establishing admin permissions/purpose and specifying parameter format. Zero wasted words or redundant information.

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 mutation tool with 2 parameters (0% schema coverage), no annotations, and an output schema (which helps but doesn't excuse the description), the description is inadequate. It lacks essential context about the override operation's behavior, payload structure, security implications, and relationship to sibling tools. The presence of an output schema doesn't compensate for these gaps.

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. It mentions 'Pass override payload as JSON string' which partially explains the 'body' parameter, but doesn't clarify what the payload should contain or provide any information about the 'tenant_id' parameter. 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 tool's purpose: 'override the status of a data erasure request' with the specific HTTP method 'POST /dw/dataerasure/admin?action=statusoverride'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'cdp_get_data_erasure_status' (read) and 'cdp_update_data_erasure_request' (update), but doesn't explicitly contrast with them.

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 minimal guidance: 'Admin-only' indicates a permission requirement, but doesn't specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'cdp_update_data_erasure_request' or 'cdp_get_data_erasure_status'. No explicit when-not-to-use or prerequisite information is given.

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