Gitopia MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and discloses critical behavioral traits: it 'Signs and broadcasts an on-chain transaction' (mutation nature), 'Returns the repository URL' (output), and explains owner_id default behavior using current user context.

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?

Every sentence earns its place: purpose and scope are front-loaded, followed by technical behavior, return value, parameter specifics, and alternative recommendations. No redundant or filler text.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description adequately covers the return value (URL), mutation side effects (on-chain transaction), and parameter defaults. Slightly short of perfect as it omits error scenarios or naming constraints.

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%, requiring the description to compensate. It adds valuable semantics for owner_id (default user context behavior) but only repeats structural information for name and description ('Requires', 'Optional') without explaining formats, constraints, or specific meanings.

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 explicitly states the tool creates a 'remote repository on Gitopia' and distinguishes it from siblings by specifying 'without local initialization,' contrasting with bootstrap_repo which handles local initialization.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance ('when you need to create a remote repository... without local initialization') and clearly names the alternative ('Prefer bootstrap_repo if you also want to initialize locally'), including a 'See also' reference to git_clone.

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