BetterTouchTool MCP Server

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the agent knows this is a safe, read-only operation. The description adds value by mentioning the tool's purpose for 'explore and understand the current BTT configuration,' which provides context beyond annotations. However, it doesn't disclose additional behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication needs, or pagination behavior. With annotations covering safety, a 3 is appropriate for adding some 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?

The description is appropriately sized and front-loaded: the first sentence states the purpose, followed by usage guidance and parameter/return details. Every sentence adds value, with no redundant information. However, the structure could be slightly improved by more clearly separating sections (e.g., bullet points for filters), but it remains efficient and well-organized.

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 (1 parameter with nested filtering options), rich annotations (read-only, idempotent), and the presence of an output schema (implied by 'Returns' section), the description is mostly complete. It explains the tool's purpose, usage context, filtering capabilities, and output format. However, it lacks details on error handling or specific examples of trigger types, which could enhance completeness for a retrieval tool with filtering.

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%, meaning the schema provides no descriptions for parameters. The description compensates by listing filter options: 'trigger type, parent folder, specific app, or get all triggers,' and mentions 'response_format setting' for output. However, it doesn't fully explain the 'params' object structure or all available filters beyond the examples given. Since schema coverage is low, the description adds meaningful but incomplete parameter semantics, warranting a baseline 3.

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's purpose: 'Retrieve triggers from BetterTouchTool with optional filtering.' It specifies the verb ('retrieve') and resource ('triggers'), and mentions filtering capabilities. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'btt_get_trigger' (singular) or 'btt_list_named_triggers', which reduces the score from a perfect 5.

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 some usage context: 'Use this tool to explore and understand the current BTT configuration.' This implies it's for exploration rather than modification, but it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'btt_get_trigger' (singular) or 'btt_list_named_triggers'. No explicit exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, leaving usage guidance at an implied level.

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