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 'update' implying mutation, but fails to disclose behavioral traits like required permissions, whether changes are reversible, rate limits, or response format. This is a significant gap 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. It's appropriately sized for a simple update tool, though it could be more informative without sacrificing brevity.

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 a mutation tool with 3 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and an output schema (which helps but isn't described), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on updatable fields, behavioral context, and parameter meanings, making it inadequate for safe and effective use.

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 only mentions 'updated fields as a JSON string' for the 'body' parameter, but doesn't explain what fields are updatable, the JSON structure, or the purpose of 'user_id' and 'tenant_id'. This leaves most parameter semantics unclear.

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 states the action ('Update') and resource ('self-service user'), but it's vague about what fields can be updated or what constitutes a self-service user. It doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like 'cdp_update_user' or 'cdp_update_selfservice_user_status', leaving ambiguity about scope.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'cdp_update_user' or 'cdp_update_selfservice_user_status'), nor any prerequisites or context for usage. The description only states what the tool does, not when to apply it.

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