Conekta MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses pagination behavior, which is valuable, but doesn't mention authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or what 'system events' encompass. It adequately describes the core operation but lacks comprehensive behavioral context.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a structured Args section. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it efficient and well-organized for quick comprehension.

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 no annotations, 0% schema coverage, but an output schema exists, the description covers the essential operation and parameters adequately. It could improve by clarifying the nature of 'system events' or linking to sibling tools, but it's largely complete for a list tool with pagination.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaningful semantics for all three parameters: 'limit' specifies range and default, 'next_page' and 'previous_page' explain their role in pagination. This goes beyond the bare schema, though it could detail cursor format or pagination mechanics more.

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 verb ('List') and resource ('system events'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_event' or 'list_orders', which would require more explicit scope definition.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_event' or other list tools. The description mentions pagination but doesn't explain when pagination is needed or how it relates to sibling operations.

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