Tally MCP Server

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. 'Delete' implies a destructive, irreversible mutation, but the description doesn't specify permissions required, whether deletions are permanent or recoverable, rate limits, or what happens upon success/failure. This is a significant gap 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, efficient sentence with zero waste—'Delete a specific form submission'—making it appropriately sized and front-loaded. Every word earns its place by conveying the core action and target without redundancy.

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 complexity (a destructive mutation with 2 parameters), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address behavioral aspects like safety, permissions, or response format, leaving critical gaps for an AI agent to understand and invoke the tool correctly in context.

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 100%, with both parameters ('formId' and 'submissionId') clearly documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as format examples or relationships between parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 action ('Delete') and the resource ('a specific form submission'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from potential alternatives like 'delete_tally_form' or other deletion tools in the sibling list, which would require more specificity for a perfect score.

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. With sibling tools including 'delete_tally_form' and 'delete_tally_webhook', there's no indication of when to choose deletion of a form submission over deletion of an entire form or webhook, nor any prerequisites or exclusions mentioned.

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