MCP J-Link Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It states this is a connection operation and mentions prerequisite (jlink_open), but doesn't disclose important behavioral aspects like error conditions, timeout behavior, authentication requirements, or what happens if connection fails. The description adds some context but 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 well-structured with purpose statement, prerequisite, examples, and parameter documentation. It's appropriately sized for a 3-parameter tool with complex usage context. Every sentence serves a clear purpose, though the parameter documentation could be slightly more concise.

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's complexity (connection operation with prerequisites), 0% schema coverage, but presence of output schema, the description does well. It covers purpose, prerequisites, parameter semantics, and examples. The output schema existence means return values don't need explanation. Some behavioral context is still missing for a connection tool.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by providing detailed parameter explanations: chip_name is explained as target chip name from SEGGER device database with examples, speed is explained with options and format examples, and interface is explained with options and default. This adds substantial meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 action ('連線到目標晶片' - connect to target chip) and resource (target chip), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like jlink_open (which must be called first) and jlink_close, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from other connection-related tools in the sibling list.

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 explicit prerequisites ('必須先透過 jlink_open 開啟探針' - must first open probe via jlink_open) and gives clear examples of when to use it (connecting to specific chips). It also implicitly distinguishes from jlink_open by stating the dependency relationship.

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