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 mentions the tool streams events, implying a real-time, ongoing operation, but does not disclose critical behavioral traits such as whether it's a blocking call, how to stop the stream, error handling, rate limits, or authentication requirements. This is a significant gap for a streaming 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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the key action ('Stream incoming Lichess events') and provides specific examples. Every word earns its place with no waste 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 complexity of a streaming tool, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on how the stream works (e.g., format, termination, errors), which is crucial for an AI agent to use it correctly. The description does not compensate for the missing structured information.

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 parameters need documentation. The description does not add parameter details, which is appropriate. Baseline is 4 for 0 parameters, as it 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 tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Stream') and resource ('incoming Lichess events'), and distinguishes it from siblings by specifying the types of events (game starts, incoming challenges, correspondence game moves). It's not a tautology and provides concrete details.

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 context by specifying what events are streamed, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when real-time updates are needed vs. fetching static data from other tools). It provides clear context 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.