llmconveyors-mcp

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Excellently discloses safety ('Read-only, no side effects') and authorization requirements ('Requires scope: jobs:read or sales:read'). Also previews what data the manifest contains, giving behavioral context.

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?

Three declarative sentences, each serving distinct purposes: (1) capability definition, (2) usage guidance, (3) safety/auth constraints. No filler words. Efficient information density.

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 single-parameter metadata retrieval tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains what the manifest contains (fields, capabilities, billing) and what permissions are required. Missing only explicit return format details, which is acceptable given the tool's simplicity.

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?

Schema has 100% coverage with the single 'agentType' parameter fully described in JSON schema (including enum values). Description mentions 'agent type' in the first sentence but doesn't redundantly describe the parameter. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema documentation is complete.

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?

Clear specific verb ('Get') + resource ('manifest for an agent type') + detailed scope ('input fields, capabilities, supported options, and billing information'). Effectively distinguishes from sibling execution tools like job-hunter-run and b2b-sales-run by positioning this as a discovery/metadata tool.

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: 'discover what parameters an agent accepts before running it' (temporal sequencing distinguishes from execution tools) and 'to display pricing information.' Lacks explicit naming of alternative tools (e.g., 'use job-hunter-run to execute') or explicit exclusions, but provides clear contextual guidance.

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