Aedifion MCP Server

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Uses 'Get' implying read-only operation and mentions 'logged-in user' indicating session-scoped behavior, but lacks details on return structure, caching, rate limits, or error conditions (e.g., unauthenticated).

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?

Single 5-word sentence front-loaded with action verb. Zero redundancy or waste. Appropriate length for a zero-parameter getter.

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 read operation with output schema present (per context signals). Doesn't explain return values but output schema exists. Could benefit from mentioning relationship to company roles or permissions systems given the sibling density.

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?

Input schema has 0 parameters (baseline 4 per rules). Description adds value by specifying 'logged-in user's roles', explaining why no user ID parameter appears (user inferred from authentication context), which helps agents understand the implicit parameterization.

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 (logged-in user's roles). Distinguishes from get_company_roles (company-wide roles vs user-specific) and get_user_permissions (roles vs permissions), but could clarify what roles represent (e.g., admin versus viewer distinction) or explicitly contrast with siblings.

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 explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives like get_company_roles or get_user_permissions. Missing prerequisites (e.g., requires active session) or typical use cases (e.g., 'use to check authorization before admin operations').

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