bamwor-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 discloses that the tool returns 'a list of matching countries with basic data,' which adds some behavioral context (output format). However, it lacks details on rate limits, error conditions, or what 'basic data' entails, leaving gaps for a search operation.

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 concise and front-loaded in a single sentence, efficiently stating the tool's purpose and output. However, the mention of 'optional region filter' without corresponding schema support adds a minor inefficiency.

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, no output schema, and a simple input schema, the description is moderately complete. It covers the purpose and output type but lacks details on error handling, data format, or how the 'region filter' works (since it's not in the schema). For a search tool, this is adequate but has clear gaps.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents the two parameters (query and limit). The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by mentioning 'optional region filter,' but this isn't reflected in the input schema, creating a slight mismatch. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles most param semantics.

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 tool's purpose: 'Search for countries by name or keyword, with optional region filter.' It specifies the verb (search), resource (countries), and scope (name/keyword with region filter). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'search_cities' or 'get_country' beyond the resource type, missing 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 implies usage for searching countries by name/keyword with region filtering, but doesn't provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_country' (for specific country data) or 'search_cities' (for city searches). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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