MCP Server Box

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states it 'List all metadata templates' and returns 'A list of all metadata templates'. It doesn't disclose behavioral traits like pagination, rate limits, authentication needs, or whether it's read-only vs. destructive, which is inadequate for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose but includes boilerplate 'Args' and 'Returns' sections that repeat obvious information (e.g., 'ctx' parameter and return type). This adds unnecessary length without enhancing clarity, reducing efficiency.

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 the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no output schema) but lack of annotations, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address behavioral aspects like response format details, error handling, or integration context, leaving gaps for the agent despite low complexity.

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?

The tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema fully documents inputs. The description adds no parameter information, which is acceptable given the baseline; it doesn't need to compensate, but also doesn't provide extra value beyond the 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'all metadata templates in Box', providing specific purpose. However, it doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like 'box_metadata_template_get_by_key_tool' or 'box_metadata_template_get_by_name_tool' which retrieve specific templates, missing full differentiation.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks context about use cases, prerequisites, or comparisons to sibling tools such as 'box_metadata_template_get_by_key_tool' for retrieving specific templates, leaving the agent without usage direction.

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