Aedifion MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden but offers only 'Get details' implying read-only access. It lacks information on auth requirements, what specific details are returned, rate limits, or error handling (e.g., invalid app_id).

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 first sentence delivers the core purpose immediately. The Args section is structured and readable, though technically redundant with the JSON schema (which has no descriptions). No fluff, but the docstring format consumes space that could elaborate on semantics.

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?

Adequate for a single-parameter retrieval tool without output schema, providing just enough to invoke correctly. However, given the domain complexity (app vs instance distinction among siblings), the description lacks critical context needed to select the correct tool from the suite.

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?

Compensates for 0% schema description coverage by identifying `app_id` as 'The controls app identifier' in the Args section. However, it provides minimal value beyond the parameter name itself—no format specifications, examples, or where to obtain valid IDs are given.

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?

States a clear verb ('Get') and resource ('details of a specific controls app'), establishing the retrieval pattern. However, it fails to differentiate from sibling `get_controls_apps` (list vs single) or clarify the relationship between a 'controls app' and 'controls instance' given the presence of sibling instance tools.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this singular retrieval versus the plural `get_controls_apps`, nor when to query an app versus an instance. No prerequisites, error conditions, or alternatives are mentioned.

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