meta-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It successfully documents authentication requirements (permission scope and API type) but omits other behavioral traits like pagination limits, rate limiting, or error conditions that would help an agent predict execution outcomes.

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?

The description consists of exactly two sentences with zero redundancy: the first declares the operation, the second states prerequisites. Every word earns its place in this highly efficient structure.

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?

Given three simple parameters with complete schema documentation, the description adequately covers authentication requirements. However, lacking an output schema, it misses an opportunity to describe the conversation list structure or pagination behavior beyond the cursor parameter, leaving gaps in contextual understanding.

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 description coverage is 100%, with all three parameters (folder, limit, after) fully documented in the schema. The description provides minimal additional parameter context beyond implying a list operation, meeting the baseline expectation for high-coverage schemas.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves 'Instagram DM conversations list' with specific verb (Get) and resource (DM conversations). It implicitly distinguishes from sibling 'ig_get_messages' by specifying 'conversations' rather than individual messages, though it doesn't explicitly highlight this distinction.

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 provides prerequisite requirements (permission 'instagram_manage_messages' and Instagram Messaging API) but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus sibling alternatives like 'ig_get_messages' or 'ig_send_message'. It states when you can use it but not when you should prefer it over alternatives.

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