helpGet context-aware assistance for debmatic MCP: ask about a tool to learn its usage, a device type for its capabilities, or omit arguments for a conceptual guide.
Context-aware help. No args: conceptual guide. Tool name (e.g. 'set_value'): tool usage. Device type (e.g. 'HmIP-eTRV-2'): capabilities from cache.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| topic | No | Tool name, device type, or omit for general guide |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations indicate read-only. Description adds that device capabilities come from cache, which is useful beyond annotations. No contradictions.
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?
Extremely concise: three clauses covering all modes. No wasted words.
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?
Simple tool with one optional param and no output schema. Description covers all usage modes. Missing guidance on invalid topics, but not critical.
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 describes parameter 'topic' with same info. Description adds examples but no new semantic meaning beyond schema. Baseline 3 due to high schema coverage.
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 tool provides context-aware help with three modes: no args for conceptual guide, tool name for usage, device type for capabilities. It uses specific verbs and resources.
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 gives explicit usage scenarios with examples (no args, tool name, device type). It does not mention when not to use, but the context is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.