hostinger-api-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It states 'Delete' which implies a destructive operation, but doesn't disclose critical behavioral traits like whether deletion is permanent, requires specific permissions, has side effects (e.g., on subscriptions), or error conditions. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by usage context. Every word earns its place with zero waste, making it highly efficient and well-structured.

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?

For a destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral implications, error handling, and return values, which are crucial for safe and effective use. The high schema coverage doesn't compensate for these gaps.

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 100%, with the parameter 'paymentMethodId' documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage without adding value.

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 ('Delete') and resource ('payment method from your account'), making the purpose unambiguous. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like billing_setDefaultPaymentMethodV1 or billing_getPaymentMethodListV1, which prevents a perfect score.

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 second sentence provides some context ('remove unused payment methods'), implying usage for cleanup, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives (e.g., if a payment method is in use) or prerequisites. This leaves room for interpretation but is better than no guidance.

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