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 it's a list operation, implying read-only behavior, but doesn't disclose pagination behavior (despite offset/limit parameters), authentication requirements, rate limits, or what 'accessible to the current user' entails. The description is minimal and lacks behavioral context.

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. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and appropriately sized for a simple list tool.

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 the tool has an output schema (which likely describes the return structure), the description doesn't need to explain return values. However, with no annotations, 0% schema coverage for parameters, and multiple sibling tools, the description is too minimal—it doesn't address pagination, filtering, or differentiation from alternatives, leaving gaps for the 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. It mentions no parameters at all, failing to explain what 'offset' and 'limit' do, their default values, or how they affect the listing. With two undocumented parameters, the description adds zero 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 verb ('List') and resource ('tenants'), specifying that it returns all tenants accessible to the current user. It distinguishes from siblings like 'cdp_get_tenant' (singular) by indicating it's a list operation, but doesn't explicitly contrast with other list tools (e.g., 'cdp_list_users').

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites, when not to use it, or how it differs from other tenant-related tools like 'cdp_get_tenant' or 'cdp_list_tenant_clusters'.

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