Marlo MCP

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. The description 'get market rate details' only indicates a read operation but fails to specify whether it's safe, idempotent, or has side effects. It doesn't mention authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or what the return format looks like. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is completely inadequate.

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 extremely concise ('get market rate details'), which could be a strength if it were informative. However, it's under-specified rather than efficiently structured—it lacks front-loaded critical information and doesn't use its brevity to convey essential details. While not verbose, it fails to earn its place with meaningful content.

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 the tool's complexity (1 parameter with no schema documentation, no annotations, no output schema), the description is severely incomplete. It doesn't explain what market rates are, what details are returned, how to use the parameter, or behavioral aspects. For a tool in a domain with many siblings (e.g., financial/maritime data), this leaves the agent with insufficient context to operate effectively.

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?

The input schema has 1 parameter with 0% description coverage, meaning the parameter 'api_identifier' is undocumented in the schema. The description provides no information about this parameter—what it represents, valid values, format, or examples. With no parameter details in either the schema or description, the agent cannot understand how to invoke the tool correctly.

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 'get market rate details' is a tautology that essentially restates the tool name without adding meaningful context. It specifies a verb ('get') and resource ('market rate details'), but lacks specificity about what market rates are or what details are retrieved. Compared to sibling tools like 'get_market_rates' (likely a list operation) and 'get_interest_rates', it doesn't clearly differentiate its purpose.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, appropriate contexts, or comparisons to sibling tools like 'get_market_rates' or 'get_interest_rates'. Without any usage instructions, an agent cannot determine when this tool is the correct choice.

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