Vitally MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions searching by 'multiple criteria' but doesn't describe what happens when no criteria are provided (all 3 parameters are optional), whether results are paginated, sorted, or what format they return. For a search tool with no annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 a single sentence that efficiently states the core function. While 'Vitally tool' adds unnecessary branding, the main message is clear and front-loaded. There's no wasted verbiage, though it could be more informative without sacrificing conciseness.

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 search tool with 3 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what constitutes a successful search, what happens with partial matches, how results are structured, or error conditions. The lack of output schema means the description should compensate by explaining return values, which it doesn't do.

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%, so all parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by mentioning 'multiple criteria' which aligns with the three parameters shown. However, it doesn't provide additional context about parameter interactions, search logic (AND/OR), or default behaviors beyond what's in the schema descriptions.

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 states the tool searches for accounts by multiple criteria, which provides a basic purpose. However, it's vague about what 'Vitally tool' means and doesn't clearly distinguish this search tool from sibling tools like 'find_account_by_name' or 'search_users'. The description lacks specificity about the search scope or resource type beyond 'accounts'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'find_account_by_name' and 'search_users', the description doesn't explain when this multi-criteria search is preferable over more specific tools. There's no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions for usage.

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