Test Server

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds valuable behavioral context: transient connection, non-persistence, listing tools, and latency measurement. No contradictions; the description complements annotations effectively.

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?

Two sentences with no redundant words. The first sentence delivers the core action; the second provides critical caveats. Perfectly front-loaded and succinct.

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?

Despite the tool's simplicity, the description covers purpose, behavior, prerequisites, and exclusions. With output schema present, return values need no explanation. Complete for the given 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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage with clear parameter definitions. The description does not add additional semantics beyond what the schema already provides for 'name' and 'timeout_ms'. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Transiently connect'), names the resource ('MCP server from conductor config'), and lists key actions ('list its tools and measure latency'). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like 'add_server' or 'diagnose_server' by emphasizing transience and non-persistence.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: for transient testing of a configured server. Provides clear exclusion ('Does NOT persist the connection or register the server') and a prerequisite ('server must be present in ~/.mcp-conductor.json'). No sibling tool offers the same function.

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