Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• fetch_poll_resultsB
  3.3/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It does not mention whether the operation is read-only, what happens if the poll_id is invalid, or any side effects. This is insufficient for a retrieval tool with no structured behavioral disclosure.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is two sentences: first clearly states the action, second provides a usage hint. It is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  With no output schema and three parameters, the description is too brief. It does not explain the return format, pagination, error behavior, or what data is included in the results. Agents need more context to use the tool correctly.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters2/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions, but the poll_id description says 'ID of the specific standup to fetch reports for', which appears inconsistent with the tool name (polls vs standups). The tool description does not clarify or correct this, so it does not add meaningful value beyond the schema and may even mislead.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description states 'Retrieves Geekbot poll results' with a specific verb and resource, and also provides use cases (analyze results, track progress). It implies differentiation from siblings like list_polls (which lists polls) by noting it is used after list_polls.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description mentions it is 'usually used after the list_polls tool to get the poll id', providing a sequential usage hint. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives like fetch_reports or state when not to use this tool.

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

• fetch_reportsA
  3.7/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'Retrieves' without mentioning any potential issues like large result sets if no filters are applied, authentication requirements, or rate limits.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is very concise with two sentences. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second provides context on usage and ordering. No unnecessary information.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the tool has 4 optional parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose and usage hint but lacks behavioral details (e.g., default behavior when no filters are set). It is minimally sufficient but not comprehensive.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The input schema has 100% description coverage for all 4 parameters. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline without adding value.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool retrieves Geekbot standup reports, uses specific verbs, and provides use cases like analyzing team updates. It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning it is used after list_standups, differentiating it from fetch_poll_results.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description explains when to use the tool (to analyze standup reports) and suggests it is typically used after list_standups. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like fetch_poll_results.

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

• list_membersA
  3.8/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, and the description only implies read-only behavior. It does not disclose permissions, limits, or any side effects, failing to compensate for missing annotations.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Two brief sentences convey the purpose and usage without any unnecessary words. Every sentence adds value.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a simple list tool with no parameters, the description adequately covers what it returns and its context. Lack of output schema is acceptable for such a straightforward function.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  With 0 parameters, the baseline is 4. The description adds no further parameter information, but none is needed.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the verb ('Lists') and the resource ('team members participating in standups and polls'). It distinguishes from siblings like list_polls and list_standups by focusing on members.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Provides guidance to 'get information about colleagues' but lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives. The sibling tools are different enough that confusion is unlikely.

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

• list_pollsA
  4/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  With no annotations provided, the description bears the full burden. It indicates a read operation ('Retrieves and displays'), but lacks details on side effects, pagination, or error handling. The description is adequate for a simple list but not rich.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single well-formed sentence that front-loads the purpose and includes key details. Every word earns its place; no unnecessary content.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given no parameters and no output schema, the description lists the fields returned, which is sufficient for understanding what the tool does. It does not cover error scenarios, but for a simple list tool, it is complete enough.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The input schema has no parameters (100% coverage vacuously). The description adds meaning by enumerating the configuration fields returned (name, time, timezone, etc.), which is helpful beyond the empty schema. A baseline of 4 is appropriate.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the verb 'Retrieves and displays' and the resource 'all Geekbot polls a user has access to', with specific fields listed (name, time, etc.). It distinguishes from siblings like fetch_poll_results and list_standups.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies that this tool is for listing polls, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives (e.g., fetch_poll_results, list_standups) or any prerequisites (e.g., user authentication). It provides clear context but no exclusions.

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

• list_standupsA
  4/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behaviors. It mentions returning configuration details but lacks details on pagination, performance, or limitations. Adequate but not thorough.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Two sentences: first states action and scope, second gives usage guidance. No wasted words.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given no output schema and no annotations, the description is mostly complete for a zero-param retrieval tool. It could mention pagination or return structure limitations.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Input schema has no parameters, so the description need not add param info. Baseline 4 is appropriate.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states that it retrieves all Geekbot standups with configuration details, using a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from siblings like list_members and list_polls.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides a usage context ('understand structure of the team and processes') but does not explicitly compare to alternatives or give when-not-to-use guidance.

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

• post_reportA
  4.3/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses the need for preview and handling of missing info, but does not explain success/failure behavior, side effects, or idempotency. Minor typo 'reporte' but not impactful.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness3/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Description is informative but somewhat verbose with slight redundancy (first two sentences say similar things). Could be more concise while retaining key guidance.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Covers workflow (list_standups associations, preview requirement, missing info handling) but lacks explanation of expected output or error conditions. Adequate but could be more complete given no output schema.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema has 100% coverage, baseline 3. Description adds value by explaining that standup_id comes from list_standups and that answers must include all question IDs, beyond the schema's description.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states 'Posts a report to Geekbot' and distinguishes from sibling tools (fetch/list operations). It specifies the verb (post) and resource (report), providing unambiguous purpose.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines5/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Explicitly states it is used after `list_standups` to obtain IDs, instructs to ask for missing information, and requires a formatted preview before calling. This provides clear when-to-use and preparatory steps.

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