SpherePay 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 of behavioral disclosure. While it mentions pagination (a useful behavioral trait), it doesn't address critical aspects like whether this is a read-only operation, what authentication is required, rate limits, error conditions, or what happens when no accounts exist. For a list operation with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps.

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 - a single sentence that communicates the core purpose and one key behavioral trait (pagination). There's no wasted language, and the information is front-loaded. Every word earns its place in this minimal description.

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 there's an output schema (which handles return values), the description doesn't need to explain the response format. However, for a list operation with 2 parameters and no annotations, the description is quite minimal. It covers the basic purpose and mentions pagination, but leaves many behavioral aspects unaddressed. The existence of an output schema raises the baseline, but the description could still provide more context about the operation.

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 description mentions 'pagination' which implies the existence of page/limit parameters, but doesn't explain what these parameters mean or how they work. With 0% schema description coverage and 2 parameters, the description adds minimal value beyond what can be inferred from the parameter names. The baseline is 3 since the schema provides the parameter structure, but the description doesn't compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 ('SpherePay virtual accounts'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It also mentions 'with pagination' which adds useful context about the operation's scope. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate this tool from its sibling 'get_virtual_account' (singular vs. plural), which would be needed for a perfect score.

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. It doesn't mention when to use list_virtual_accounts versus get_virtual_account (for retrieving a single account), nor does it provide any context about prerequisites, permissions, or typical use cases. The agent must infer usage from the tool name alone.

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