molt-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and discloses: mutation behavior (append with newline separator), authentication requirements (write key), and specific error conditions (403 for read keys). Minor gap: does not describe behavior when document ID is not found.

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?

Front-loaded with action and constraints, followed by structured Args section. No wasted words; every sentence provides essential information about behavior, auth, or parameter 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?

Complete for a 3-parameter tool with an output schema (which exempts it from describing return values). All parameters documented, auth covered. Minor deduction for not mentioning potential 404 errors or explicit sibling differentiation.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description comprehensively documents all three parameters: doc_id ('UUID of the document'), content ('Markdown content'), and if_match ('version ETag to prevent conflicts'). Fully compensates for the bare schema.

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?

Description provides specific verb (append), resource (document), and scope (end of document, separated by newline). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling 'update_doc' (general modification) and 'create_doc' (new document creation).

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?

Explicitly states authentication requirements ('Requires write key. The API will return 403 if a read key is used'), providing clear prerequisites for usage. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over 'update_doc' (append vs. replace scenarios).

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