Create a new Firefly III rule by specifying title, trigger, and rule group ID to automate transaction handling.
Store a new rule.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| title | Yes | ||
| trigger | Yes | ||
| rule_group_id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v3.0.0Does 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 only states the action without any detail on side effects, validation requirements, or what constitutes a valid rule, which is a critical gap for a creation operation.
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 is extremely concise with no wasted words, but the brevity comes at the cost of essential information. It is not verbose, yet it under-specifies to the point of being unhelpful, so a middling score is appropriate.
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 the tool has 3 required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain what a rule is, what the trigger represents, or how rule_group_id relates to other resources, leaving the agent without enough context to call it reliably.
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 0% and the description does not mention any parameters. The agent receives no explanation of what 'title', 'trigger', or 'rule_group_id' mean, making it impossible to correctly populate them without external knowledge.
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 'Store a new rule.' clearly indicates a creation operation for a rule resource, which distinguishes it from update/delete siblings. The verb 'store' is slightly generic but still conveys the intent, and the resource name is explicit.
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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any conditions, exclusions, or related tools, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.