mcp-synology

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

Annotations declare read-only/non-destructive safety profile; description adds valuable domain context that items are restorable. No contradictions with annotations.

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 tightly constructed sentences. First establishes scope, second adds restorability context. No redundancy or 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?

Adequate for a listing tool with output schema present, but gaps remain: 0% schema coverage necessitates parameter hints (especially sorting/filtering options) which are absent.

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 coverage is 0%, requiring description compensation. Description mentions 'shared folder' (hints at 'share' parameter) but fails to explain 'pattern' filtering, 'sort_by'/'sort_direction' options, or 'limit' despite complete 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?

Specific verb 'List' with clear resource 'shared folder's recycle bin'. Second sentence clarifies content scope (recently deleted/restorable files), distinguishing from sibling 'list_files' which presumably lists active files.

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?

Implies usage context through 'can be restored' (recovery scenarios), but lacks explicit guidance on when to use versus 'list_files' or 'search_files' siblings.

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