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 states 'Delete' implying a destructive mutation, but doesn't disclose critical behaviors like whether deletion is permanent, requires specific permissions, has side effects, or returns confirmation. This is inadequate 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 a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words, making it easy to parse. It's appropriately sized for a simple tool, though brevity contributes to gaps in other dimensions.

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 destructive mutation tool with no annotations, 0% schema coverage, and an output schema (which helps but isn't described), the description is incomplete. It lacks behavioral context, parameter details, and usage guidance, making it insufficient for safe and effective tool invocation.

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 'by ID', which hints at the 'user_id' parameter, but doesn't explain the 'tenant_id' parameter or its optionality. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, failing to fully address the coverage gap.

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 ('Delete') and target resource ('a CDP user by ID'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling deletion tools like 'cdp_delete_client' or 'cdp_delete_role', which follow the same pattern, so it misses full sibling 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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites, or exclusions. Given the sibling tools include 'cdp_delete_user' and others like 'cdp_delete_selfservice_user', there's no indication of which to choose in different contexts.

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