Aedifion MCP Server

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It mentions pagination parameters but fails to disclose default behaviors when null (likely returns all or first page), rate limits, permissions required, or that results are paginated.

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 Args-section format is functional and wastes no words. The single-line purpose statement is front-loaded. The structure is slightly dry (docstring-style) but appropriate for the technical content.

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 simple list retrieval with existing output schema. However, given zero schema descriptions, the description should elaborate on pagination defaults (e.g., whether null returns all items) and 'realm' scope definition.

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, the description minimally compensates by labeling 'page' as 'Page number' and 'per_page' as 'Items per page'. This adds meaning beyond the schema titles but lacks details on valid ranges, default behavior, or maximum values.

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 specific verb ('Get') and resource ('companies in the realm'), with 'all' distinguishing it from sibling 'get_company' (singular). However, it doesn't explain what constitutes a 'realm' or explicitly contrast with the singular variant.

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 versus 'get_company' or other filtering alternatives. The pagination arguments imply bulk retrieval, but prerequisites or selection criteria are absent.

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