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. It discloses that the tool revokes tokens (destructive behavior) and explains different revocation scopes (single token vs all user tokens). However, it doesn't mention authentication requirements, rate limits, or what happens after logout (e.g., session termination effects).

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?

Two sentences with zero waste. The first sentence states the core purpose, the second explains parameter usage. Every word earns its place, and the structure is front-loaded with the main action.

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, but with an output schema present, the description is reasonably complete. It covers the destructive nature and parameter semantics well. The output schema likely handles return values, so the description doesn't need to explain them. Some behavioral context like auth requirements is missing.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and 3 parameters, the description fully compensates by explaining the semantic meaning of each parameter: 'token' revokes a specific bearer token, while 'username/password' revokes all tokens for that user. This adds crucial context 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 ('logout and revoke') and resource ('current bearer token'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'cdp_login' and 'cdp_revoke_token'. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'cdp_revoke_token' which might handle token revocation differently.

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 clear context on when to use specific parameters (token vs username/password), implying usage scenarios. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use this tool or name alternatives like 'cdp_revoke_token', but the parameter guidance is helpful.

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