Maître d'MCP

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It correctly identifies the read-only nature via 'Show' and documents the return value ('formatted summary'), but omits details about authentication requirements, rate limits, data persistence, or whether results are cached versus real-time.

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?

Description is two efficient sentences with zero redundancy. The first sentence front-loads the core purpose with specific content categories; the second documents the return value. No filler text or tautology present.

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?

For a zero-parameter read tool with existing output schema, the description is fully complete. It defines the resource scope (four preference categories) and acknowledges the return structure, satisfying all informational needs without over-documenting what the output schema already provides.

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 contains zero properties. Per scoring rules, zero parameters establishes a baseline of 4. The description appropriately avoids inventing parameter documentation where none exist in the schema.

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 specific verb 'Show' with resource 'restaurant preferences' and enumerates exact scope (dietary restrictions, favorite cuisines, saved locations, dining defaults). The term 'current' clearly positions this as a retrieval operation, distinguishing it from sibling tools 'setup_preferences' (creation) and 'update_preferences' (modification).

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 implies read-only usage through 'Show' and 'current' but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this versus 'setup_preferences' or 'update_preferences'. The agent must infer from verb semantics rather than explicit directives.

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