Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• generate_barcodeA
  3.7/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, covering safety. The description adds 'Returns a PNG image' as a behavioral detail not present in the schema or annotations. However, it discloses no format-specific constraints, error conditions, or side-effect details, so transparency is partial.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and output type. The long list of formats is redundant with the schema enum but serves as a quick reference and contains no filler words. It is efficient though slightly verbose due to the exhaustive list.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the schema fully documents parameters and annotations cover the read-only safety, the description adequately explains the tool's function and output (PNG). It lacks details on error handling or format-specific limitations, but these are not critical with a well-defined schema. The description is sufficiently complete for selection and invocation.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100% (all 5 parameters have descriptions). The description repeats the format enum from the schema but adds no new parameter semantics, so it provides no value beyond the structured schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Generate a barcode image in various formats' and specifies the output type ('Returns a PNG image'). The list of supported formats differentiates it from sibling tools like generate_qr (which is not listed) and decode_image (which performs the opposite action).

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies usage by listing supported formats, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided, leaving usage guidance implicit rather than explicit.

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

• generate_qrA
  3.9/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, which indicates a non-destructive operation. The description adds the return format (PNG image) but no further behavioral details such as limits or side effects. No contradiction exists.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description consists of two concise sentences that front-load the primary action and output format. There is no unnecessary information.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the tool's simplicity, complete schema descriptions, and readOnlyHint annotation, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose and output. No output schema exists, but the description explicitly mentions the PNG return format, compensating for that gap.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  All three parameters (text, scale, error_correction) have descriptions in the schema, covering 100% of params. The tool description does not add additional meaning or examples beyond the schema.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool generates a QR code image from text or a URL, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings by naming QR code, unlike generate_barcode which likely handles barcodes.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies use for encoding text/URLs into QR codes but does not explicitly compare to alternatives like generate_barcode or decode_image. There is no clear 'when not to use' guidance.

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

• decode_imageA
  4.1/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already include readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds useful context: it returns all codes found and handles noisy photos via multiple preprocessing approaches. This goes beyond the annotation by disclosing output behavior and robustness, though it does not detail error handling.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and every sentence adds value. The format list is compact and directly useful, with no fluff or repetition.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  The description fully covers what the tool does, what inputs it expects, what outputs to expect (all codes found), and what formats are supported. With an output schema present and readOnlyHint annotation, no further context is needed for correct selection and invocation.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already well-documented. The description mentions the list of supported formats, which overlaps with the format_hint enum, adding little beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the verb ('Decode'), the resource ('barcodes and QR codes from a base64-encoded image'), and distinguishes it from siblings (generate_qr, generate_barcode) by focusing on decoding rather than generation. It lists supported formats, making the scope explicit.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies usage (decode an image to extract codes) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or mention any exclusions. The contrast with generation siblings is implicit, but no direct guidance is provided.

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