Resolve Tool Schema

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that schemas are returned, but does not mention potential errors (e.g., unknown tool names), side effects, or whether the tool queries live or cached data. This is insufficient for a tool with no annotation safety hints.

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 two short sentences that front-load the primary action and then specify the parameter format. No unnecessary words or redundancy.

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?

The tool is simple (one parameter, no output schema), so the description covers the basic behavior. However, it omits context about what 'deferred tools' are, what the output format looks like (e.g., JSON structure), and how failures are handled. A bit more detail would make it complete.

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?

The description explicitly explains the 'tools' parameter as 'comma-separated names', which adds meaning beyond the schema's bare 'string' type. This clarifies the format and intended usage, though it could also mention that these names refer to deferred tool identifiers.

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 returns full parameter schemas for deferred tools, using a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('parameter schemas'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like discover_tools by explicitly focusing on 'deferred tools', though the term 'deferred' is somewhat vague.

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 like discover_tools or mcp_status. The mention of 'deferred tools' implies a use case, but the description does not explain what deferred tools are or when resolution is needed.

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