sprout-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 can create drafts or scheduled posts, which implies mutation, but fails to disclose critical behavioral traits such as required permissions, rate limits, error handling, or what the output contains. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a bulleted list of parameters with clear explanations. Every sentence earns its place by providing essential information without redundancy, 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 has an output schema (which reduces the need to describe return values) but no annotations and 4 parameters, the description is moderately complete. It covers parameter semantics well but lacks behavioral context (e.g., auth needs, side effects), leaving room for improvement in guiding an agent's understanding of the tool's full 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining all 4 parameters: it clarifies 'profile_ids' as comma-separated IDs, 'text' as content, 'scheduled_send_time' as ISO 8601 for scheduling or empty for drafts, and 'customer_id' with a default from an environment variable. This adds substantial meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 action ('Create a draft or scheduled post') and the resource ('in Sprout Social'), making the purpose evident. It distinguishes this as a creation tool among siblings that are mostly retrieval/list operations, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with specific alternatives.

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 creating posts in Sprout Social, with a note about drafts vs. scheduled posts, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., no mention of sibling tools like 'get_publishing_post' for retrieval). The context is clear but lacks comparative guidance.

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