Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• sample-toolD
  1.7/5.0
  Behavior1/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description offers no information about what the tool does, whether it's read-only or destructive, what permissions it requires, rate limits, or expected behavior. It fails to provide any behavioral context beyond the generic 'demonstration purposes' statement.

  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?

  The description is extremely concise (one sentence), but this brevity comes at the cost of being under-specified rather than efficiently informative. While it's technically concise, it doesn't provide enough substance to be truly helpful. The single sentence doesn't earn its place by adding meaningful value.

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

  Completeness1/5

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

  Given that this is a tool with one parameter but no annotations and no output schema, the description is completely inadequate. It doesn't explain what the tool does, when to use it, what behavior to expect, or what it returns. For a tool that presumably performs some function (given its siblings are all Sketchfab-related), this description fails to provide the necessary context.

  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?

  Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the single 'input' parameter with its type and description. The tool description adds no additional meaning about parameters beyond what the schema provides. With complete schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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

  Purpose2/5

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

  The description 'A sample tool for demonstration purposes' is a tautology that restates the tool name 'sample-tool' without specifying what it actually does. It doesn't mention any specific verb or resource, nor does it distinguish this tool from its siblings (sketchfab-download, sketchfab-model-details, sketchfab-search). The description is vague about the tool's actual function.

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

  Usage Guidelines1/5

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

  The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings or any alternatives. There's no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions. This leaves the agent with no information about appropriate usage scenarios.

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

• sketchfab-downloadC
  2.9/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure but provides minimal information. It mentions downloading but doesn't cover important aspects like authentication requirements, rate limits, file size considerations, network behavior, or what happens if the model isn't downloadable. The description is functionally correct but lacks operational context.

  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, efficient sentence that states the core function without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a straightforward download operation and gets directly to the point with zero wasted verbiage.

  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?

  For a download tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what gets returned (file path? success status?), error conditions, authentication needs, or important constraints like the 'must be downloadable' requirement mentioned in the schema. The combination of missing behavioral context and output information creates significant gaps.

  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?

  With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3. The description doesn't add any parameter semantics beyond what's already in the schema - it doesn't explain what makes a model 'downloadable' (hinted in schema), provide format selection guidance, or clarify output path behavior. The schema already documents all three parameters thoroughly.

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

  Purpose4/5

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

  The description clearly states the verb ('download') and resource ('3D model from Sketchfab'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'sketchfab-model-details' or 'sketchfab-search' - all could involve downloading or accessing models, so the distinction isn't explicit.

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

  Usage Guidelines2/5

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

  No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'sketchfab-model-details' (which might provide metadata before downloading) or 'sketchfab-search' (which might help find models first). The description only states what the tool does, not when it's appropriate to invoke it.

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

• sketchfab-model-detailsC
  2.9/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool retrieves 'detailed information' but doesn't specify what that includes (e.g., metadata, statistics, licensing), whether it requires authentication, rate limits, or error handling. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that likely interacts with an external API.

  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, clear sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded and wastes no space, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

  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?

  For a tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what 'detailed information' includes, how results are structured, or potential errors. Given the external API context implied by the tool name, more behavioral and output details are needed for effective use.

  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, clearly documenting the single required 'modelId' parameter with its purpose and source. The description doesn't add any additional semantic context beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline score of 3 for high schema coverage.

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

  Purpose4/5

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

  The description clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('detailed information about a specific Sketchfab model'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'sketchfab-search' (which likely returns multiple models) or 'sketchfab-download' (which likely retrieves files rather than metadata).

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

  Usage Guidelines2/5

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

  The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention sibling tools like 'sketchfab-search' for finding models or 'sketchfab-download' for obtaining files, nor does it specify prerequisites such as needing a model ID from search results or URLs.

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

• sketchfab-searchC
  2.9/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool searches but doesn't describe key behaviors: whether it requires authentication, rate limits, pagination, error handling, or the format of returned results. For a search tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool operates beyond basic functionality.

  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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose without unnecessary words. It directly states what the tool does and the key inputs, making it easy to understand at a glance. Every part of the sentence contributes to clarifying the tool's function.

  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?

  Given the tool's complexity (5 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is insufficient. It lacks details on authentication requirements, result format, error conditions, and how it differs from sibling tools. For a search operation that likely returns structured data, the absence of output schema means the description should compensate by at least hinting at return types, which it does not.

  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 description mentions 'keywords and filters,' which loosely maps to parameters like 'query,' 'tags,' and 'categories.' However, with 100% schema description coverage, the schema already fully documents all 5 parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond what's in the schema, such as clarifying the tool's focus on 3D models, but doesn't provide additional semantic context or usage examples for parameters.

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

  Purpose4/5

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

  The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Search for 3D models on Sketchfab based on keywords and filters.' It specifies the verb ('Search'), resource ('3D models on Sketchfab'), and scope ('based on keywords and filters'). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'sketchfab-model-details' or 'sketchfab-download,' which would require more specific boundary definitions.

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

  Usage Guidelines2/5

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

  The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention sibling tools like 'sketchfab-download' or 'sketchfab-model-details,' nor does it specify prerequisites, such as whether authentication is required or if this is the primary search entry point. Usage is implied but not explicitly defined.

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