llmconveyors-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, description carries full burden and successfully discloses 'Read-only, no side effects' and permission requirement 'Requires scope: sessions:read'. Lacks details on error handling (e.g., document not found) or return format specifics.

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?

Four sentences total: purpose with examples, usage intent, behavioral/auth constraints, and sibling reference. Every sentence conveys distinct, essential information with zero redundancy. Well front-loaded with action verb.

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 retrieval tool with 100% schema coverage and no output schema, description adequately covers purpose, behavior, and permissions. Minor gap: does not describe return format (e.g., text vs JSON) or error conditions, though 'Retrieve the full content' implies the return value.

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 docType description 'Type of source document'. Description adds valuable semantic examples (e.g., 'original_cv', 'cv_strategy', 'cold_email_strategy') that clarify the domain context beyond the schema's mechanical description.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'Retrieve' with resource 'saved source document' and clarifies scope 'by type'. Distinguishes from sibling 'content-list-sources' by contrasting retrieval vs listing, and implicitly from 'content-delete-source' via 'read-only' declaration.

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: 'to review or display a previously saved context document'. Explicitly names alternative tool 'content-list-sources' for discovering available types rather than retrieving content.

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