brilliant-directories-mcp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'List smart lists' implies a read-only operation but doesn't specify critical behaviors like pagination (implied by parameters but not stated), filtering capabilities, sorting options, or potential side effects (e.g., rate limits, authentication needs). The description lacks any context on what the tool returns or how it handles errors, leaving significant gaps in understanding its behavior.

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 just two words, making it front-loaded and free of unnecessary details. Every word ('List smart lists') directly relates to the tool's function, though it under-specifies the purpose. There is no wasted verbiage or structural issues, earning full marks for brevity and clarity in expression.

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 of 7 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain the tool's behavior, usage context, or return values, leaving the AI agent to rely solely on the input schema. For a list tool with filtering, pagination, and sorting capabilities, the description should provide more context to ensure proper invocation and understanding of results.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with all 7 parameters clearly documented (e.g., 'limit' for records per page, 'page' for pagination). The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what the schema provides. According to the rules, when schema_description_coverage is high (>80%), the baseline score is 3 even with no param info in the description, which applies here.

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 'List smart lists' is a tautology that merely restates the tool name without adding any meaningful clarification. It doesn't specify what 'smart lists' are, what resource they belong to, or what specific action 'list' entails (e.g., retrieving all, filtered, or paginated results). While it distinguishes from obvious non-list siblings like 'createSmartList' or 'deleteSmartList', it fails to differentiate from similar list tools (e.g., 'listCategories', 'listTags') beyond the resource name.

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 doesn't mention any context, prerequisites, or comparisons to other list tools (e.g., 'listSmartList' might be for bulk retrieval vs. 'getSmartList' for single items). Without such information, an AI agent cannot make informed decisions about tool selection in different scenarios.

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