CDP MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states this is a read operation ('Get'), which is clear, but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, data freshness, or response format. The mention of 'latest streaming events' hints at dynamic data but doesn't specify behavioral traits like latency or update frequency.

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 core purpose. Every word earns its place, with no wasted text or redundancy, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

Given no annotations, 0% schema coverage, and an output schema (which handles return values), the description is minimally adequate. It clarifies the tool's purpose but lacks parameter details and behavioral context, making it incomplete for a tool with three parameters in a complex CDP environment.

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 adds no information about the three parameters (resource_name, resource_id, tenant_id), such as what they represent, examples, or constraints. This leaves parameters undocumented beyond their titles in 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 verb ('Get') and resource ('real-time Customer 360 data') with a specific scope ('includes latest streaming events'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'cdp_get_customer_360' and 'cdp_get_customer_360_detail' by emphasizing real-time data, though it doesn't explicitly name those alternatives.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'cdp_get_customer_360' or 'cdp_get_customer_360_detail'. The description implies real-time data retrieval but lacks context on prerequisites, exclusions, or specific scenarios where this tool is preferred.

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