competlab-mcp-server

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

States 'Read-only' (critical safety disclosure without annotations), clarifies temporal behavior ('past point in time'), and discloses return format ('JSON object'). Minor gap on error handling or rate limits, but covers key behavioral traits given no annotations provided.

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?

Five sentences each earning place: purpose, sibling comparison/scope, parameter guidance, safety declaration, and return format. No redundancy, well front-loaded with action and resource.

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 2-parameter retrieval tool without output schema, description adequately covers return data structure, sibling relationships, parameter sourcing, and safety. No gaps given tool complexity.

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 has 100% coverage (baseline 3). Description adds critical semantic context distinguishing checkId from runId and explicitly mapping parameter provenance to get_ai_visibility_history, which aids tool chaining.

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?

Excellent specificity with 'Get full detail for a specific AI Visibility check' followed by concrete data elements (per-competitor rankings, mention rates, AI Visibility Scores). Explicitly distinguishes from sibling get_ai_visibility_dashboard by clarifying this retrieves 'past point in time' data vs. current dashboard data.

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 parameter provenance guidance ('get checkId values from get_ai_visibility_history'), distinguishes checkId from runId, and explicitly references sibling tool get_ai_visibility_dashboard to clarify when to use each (historical detail vs current dashboard).

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