brilliant-directories-mcp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states 'Delete a form', implying a destructive mutation, but fails to describe critical traits like whether deletion is permanent, requires specific permissions, has side effects (e.g., cascading deletions), or returns confirmation data. This is inadequate for a destructive 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 a single, direct sentence with no wasted words, making it highly concise. It front-loads the core action ('Delete') and resource ('form'), though this brevity contributes to gaps in other dimensions.

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 destructive nature, lack of annotations, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It doesn't address behavioral risks, parameter meaning, or expected outcomes, failing to provide adequate context for safe and effective use by an AI agent.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for undocumented parameters. It mentions 'a form' but doesn't explain the 'form_id' parameter's purpose, format, or sourcing (e.g., from 'getForm' or 'listForms'). This adds minimal semantic value beyond the schema's structural definition.

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 'Delete a form' restates the tool name with minimal elaboration, making it tautological. It specifies the resource ('form') but lacks details on scope or constraints, and while it distinguishes from sibling 'createForm' and 'updateForm', it doesn't differentiate from other delete tools like 'deleteFormField' or 'deleteCategory' beyond the resource type.

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 doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a valid form_id), exclusions (e.g., irreversible deletion), or comparisons to other tools like 'updateForm' for modifications, leaving the agent with no usage context.

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