Lichess 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 discloses that the tool returns profile data, ratings, and stats across time controls, which is useful behavioral context. However, it does not mention potential authentication needs, rate limits, or error conditions, leaving gaps for a tool that likely requires user authentication to access personal data.

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 that are front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by specifics on return values. Every sentence adds value: the first states what is retrieved, and the second details the content, with no wasted words or redundancy.

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 is low (no parameters, simple retrieval), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It explains what data is returned (ratings, username, performance across time controls), but lacks details on authentication requirements or output format, which could be helpful for an agent to use it correctly.

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 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description does not add parameter details, which is appropriate. A baseline of 4 is applied for zero parameters, as it efficiently avoids unnecessary information.

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 'Get' and the resource 'your Lichess account profile, ratings, and stats', specifying what is retrieved. It distinguishes from siblings like 'lichess_get_user' (which gets another user's profile) by emphasizing 'your' account, and from 'lichess_get_rating_history' (which focuses on historical data) by covering current ratings and stats.

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 implies usage for retrieving one's own profile data, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'lichess_get_user' for other users' profiles or 'lichess_get_rating_history' for historical trends. It provides clear context (your account) but lacks explicit exclusions or named alternatives.

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