Rezdy Agent MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but fails to deliver. It does not specify whether searches are case-insensitive, support wildcards, perform partial matching, or how pagination behaves with the limit/offset parameters. Mutation risks and rate limits are also absent.

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 4-word fragment ('Search agent customer database') that is technically concise but suffers from underspecification. It lacks sentences entirely and front-loads nothing of value regarding behavioral constraints or sibling differentiation.

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 search tool with 6 optional parameters and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It omits critical search semantics (field matching logic, result ordering, maximum result sets) that the AI needs to formulate effective queries. Reliance on 100% schema coverage for basic parameter names is insufficient for a search operation.

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 all 6 parameters (limit, offset, email, firstName, lastName, phone) fully documented in the input schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics (e.g., regex patterns, phone formats), so it earns the baseline score for high schema coverage.

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 states the verb (search) and resource (customer database) but is vague regarding scope—'agent' is ambiguous (refers to the Rezdy Agent context, not the search target). Critically, it fails to distinguish from sibling 'rezdy_agent_get_customer', leaving the AI uncertain when to search versus retrieve by ID.

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?

No guidance provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'rezdy_agent_get_customer'. No prerequisites, search logic (AND vs OR), or filtering recommendations are mentioned. The description offers zero selection criteria.

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