brilliant-directories-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as whether it's a read-only operation, its potential side effects, authentication needs, or rate limits. It merely states the action without any operational context, leaving the agent uninformed about how the tool behaves.

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?

While concise with a single phrase, the description is under-specified and lacks structure. It doesn't front-load critical information or provide any elaboration, making it inefficient rather than appropriately brief.

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 a search tool with 2 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is completely inadequate. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, how results are structured, or any usage nuances, leaving significant gaps for the 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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, and the tool description provides no information about the parameters 'q' and 'data_id'. It doesn't explain what 'q' searches for (e.g., text queries) or what 'data_id' refers to, failing to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 'Search album groups' restates the tool name 'searchPortfolioGroups' with minimal variation, making it tautological. It doesn't specify what 'search' entails (e.g., filtering, text matching) or what 'album groups' are in this context, leaving the purpose vague beyond the 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'listPortfolioGroups' or 'getPortfolioGroup'. The description lacks any context, prerequisites, or exclusions, offering no help in distinguishing it from sibling tools.

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