meta-mcp

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Adds critical auth requirements (APP_ID/SECRET) not in schema. However, fails to disclose that this creates a persistent subscription (not one-time), whether it's idempotent, or what happens if the callback_url is unreachable.

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?

Two sentences, zero waste. First sentence establishes purpose and scope; second sentence states prerequisites. Front-loaded with essential information, no redundant or filler text.

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?

Adequate for a 4-parameter webhook tool with complete input schema. However, lacks output description (no output schema exists) - doesn't indicate whether it returns subscription ID, success boolean, or error details for invalid callback URLs.

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 good descriptions. Description adds valuable concrete examples ('instagram', 'page') for the 'object' parameter that help agents map intent to enum values. Enhances understanding beyond schema baseline.

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?

Specific verb 'Subscribe' + resource 'webhook notifications' + scope 'for an object'. Examples ('instagram', 'page') clarify target resources. Clearly distinguishes from sibling 'meta_get_webhook_subscriptions' (read vs write operation).

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?

States prerequisite credentials (META_APP_ID and META_APP_SECRET) needed for invocation. However, lacks explicit guidance on when to use this vs 'meta_get_webhook_subscriptions' or when to update existing subscriptions vs create new ones.

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