brilliant-directories-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but fails to do so. It states 'Create' implies a write operation but does not address critical aspects like permissions needed, whether the operation is idempotent, rate limits, error handling, or what happens on success (e.g., returns a user ID). This leaves significant gaps for a mutation tool.

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 extremely concise with a single phrase, 'Create a new member/user', which is front-loaded and wastes no words. While it lacks substance, it meets the criteria for brevity and structure.

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 complexity (50 parameters, mutation tool, no annotations, no output schema), the description is severely inadequate. It does not explain the tool's behavior, output, or usage context, failing to compensate for the lack of structured data. This makes it incomplete for effective agent use.

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 schema description coverage is high (82%), with detailed parameter descriptions in the schema itself. The tool description adds no parameter-specific information beyond the schema, so it provides no additional semantic value. According to the rules, with high schema coverage, the baseline score is 3.

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 'Create a new member/user' is a tautology that restates the tool name 'createUser' without adding specificity. It mentions the resource ('member/user') but lacks details about what creation entails, such as the system context or any distinguishing features from sibling tools like 'createUserMeta' or 'createUserPhoto'.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., required fields), exclusions, or comparisons to sibling tools like 'updateUser' or 'getUser', leaving the agent without context for selection.

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