List Servers

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses pagination mechanics, truncation marking, cursor defaults, the discovery_limit cap, and the registry fingerprint restart condition. These behavioral details are essential for correct invocation and are not present in annotations.

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 dense but every sentence earns its place: purpose, pagination semantics, defaults, fingerprint behavior, and sibling routing are all covered without filler. It is front-loaded with the core purpose before diving into pagination details.

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?

With an output schema present and readOnlyHint true, the description still covers the non-obvious pagination contract and fingerprint invalidation rule. Nothing needed for correct usage is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: limit is 'capped by discovery_limit, not a function cap,' and a nonzero function_cursor 'continues the same server.' It explains how the three parameters work together, exceeding schema-only documentation.

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?

States a specific action ('Discover servers') with a clear resource and payload ('function names and descriptions'). It also differentiates itself from siblings by directing search and schema retrieval to search_functions and get_functions.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent when to use alternatives: 'Use search_functions to search and get_functions for full schemas.' It also provides concrete pagination guidance for cursor handling, leaving little to inference.

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