llmconveyors-mcp

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses 'Permanently delete' (irreversibility), 'Future agent runs will no longer use this document' (downstream effect), and 'Requires scope: sessions:write' (authentication requirement). Minor gap: does not specify error behavior if the document type doesn't exist.

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?

Five compact sentences, each earning its place: core action, behavioral effect, usage context, auth requirement, and prerequisite tool. Front-loaded with the critical destructive warning and action verb. No redundancy.

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?

Complete for a single-parameter deletion tool with no output schema. Covers destruction permanence, auth scope, side effects on future sessions, and verification workflow. Only minor gap is lack of error case description (e.g., document not found behavior).

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 coverage is 100% (docType is described as 'Type of source document to delete'), establishing a baseline of 3. The description mentions 'by type' but adds no additional semantics about the 8 enum values or input format beyond what the schema provides.

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 opens with 'Permanently delete a saved source document by type,' providing a specific verb (delete), resource (source document), and scope (by type). It implicitly distinguishes from siblings like content-get-source (read vs delete) and content-delete-generation (different resource type) through explicit naming and context.

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: 'Use this to remove outdated context documents before saving new ones.' Also names a specific prerequisite tool: 'Use content-list-sources to verify which documents exist before deleting,' providing clear workflow guidance.

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