Minecraft Ops MCP

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

The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations by specifying the confirm/dry_run safety requirements. Annotations already indicate this is a non-readOnly, non-destructive, non-idempotent operation with openWorldHint, but the description provides practical safety constraints that aren't captured in 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?

The description is perfectly concise - just two sentences that each earn their place. The first sentence states the purpose, the second provides critical usage guidance. No wasted words, perfectly front-loaded with essential information.

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 that this is a server management tool with full parameter documentation in the schema, annotations covering key behavioral aspects, and an output schema present, the description provides exactly what's needed: clear purpose and critical safety guidance without redundant information.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the input schema already fully documents all 4 parameters. The description doesn't add any additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, so it meets the baseline expectation without exceeding it.

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 specific action ('Restart') and target resource ('an MCSManager instance'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like server.start, server.stop, and server.kill. It's precise about what the tool does without being tautological.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool by specifying prerequisites: 'Requires confirm=true or dry_run=true.' This provides clear guidance on required conditions for invocation, helping the agent understand the safety mechanisms in place.

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