hostinger-api-mcp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'Retrieve' and 'view,' suggesting a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as authentication needs, rate limits, or what happens if no profiles exist. This is a significant gap for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 with two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose and followed by usage context. Every sentence earns its place without waste, making it 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?

Given the tool's low complexity (1 optional parameter, no output schema), the description is somewhat complete but lacks depth. Without annotations, it should provide more behavioral context, such as error handling or response format, to fully guide an AI agent.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the 'tld' parameter documented as 'Filter by TLD (without leading dot).' The description doesn't add any additional meaning beyond this, so it meets the baseline of 3 where the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('WHOIS contact profiles'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'domains_getWHOISProfileV1' or 'domains_getWHOISProfileUsageV1', which limits its specificity.

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 a general context ('Use this endpoint to view available contact profiles for domain registration'), implying usage for viewing profiles. It doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'domains_getWHOISProfileV1' or provide exclusions, leaving some ambiguity.

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