syndicate-links-mcp

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses success behavior (returns payload with specific fields: affiliateId, programId, trackingCode, issuedAt, expiry) and failure modes (error description if invalid/expired). Lacks mention of authentication requirements or rate limits, preventing a 5.

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?

Two sentences with zero waste. First sentence covers purpose and return values; second sentence clarifies scope limitation and alternative tool. Information is front-loaded and every clause earns its place.

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?

For a single-parameter validation tool without output schema, the description compensates well by enumerating return payload fields and error cases. Covers the essential behavioral contract and sibling relationships. Minor gap regarding authorization requirements.

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% ('The slat_v1_ prefixed attribution token to verify'), establishing baseline 3. Description reinforces the token format but does not add syntax details, validation rules, or examples beyond what the schema provides.

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 uses specific verbs ('Decode and validate') with the resource ('Syndicate Links attribution token') and identifies the specific token format ('slat_v1_ prefix'). It explicitly distinguishes from sibling tool track_agent_conversion by stating it 'Does not record a conversion.'

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when NOT to use the tool ('Does not record a conversion') and names the correct alternative ('use track_agent_conversion for that'), clearly delineating the boundary between validation and conversion tracking operations.

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