Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• netlify-user-servicesD
  1.5/5.0
  Behavior1/5

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

  No annotations and the description provides no behavioral traits, side effects, permissions, or other important information beyond the operation name.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness2/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is short but lacks necessary detail. It is under-specified and does not effectively convey the tool's purpose.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness1/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the complexity (nested parameters, no schema descriptions, no output schema, no annotations), the description is severely incomplete.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters1/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 0% and the description does not explain the parameters. The nested 'selectSchema' object is left entirely undocumented.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose2/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description mentions the operation name 'get-user' but does not explain what it does. It is vague and does not clarify the action or result.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings. The description implies selection but lists only one operation, providing no context or alternatives.

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

• netlify-team-servicesD
  1.7/5.0
  Behavior1/5

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

  No annotations and no behavioral details in description. No mention of side effects, permissions, or error behavior.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness3/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Very concise, but at the expense of necessary detail. Front-loaded to state purpose, but too minimal to be helpful.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness1/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Severely incomplete given the complexity of the input schema and lack of output schema. The agent cannot infer usage without additional context.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters1/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Description adds no meaning to parameters. Schema coverage is 0% and the description does not explain the selectSchema structure or operation specific parameters.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose3/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Description states it selects and runs Netlify operations, but does not explain what get-teams or get-team do. Purpose is somewhat clear as a dispatcher, but lacks differentiation from sibling tools.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines1/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., sibling tools). No context on choosing between get-teams and get-team.

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

• netlify-project-servicesC
  2.5/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only says 'select and run', disclosing no behavioral traits like side effects, idempotency, or permission requirements. Essential for a tool with multiple write operations (e.g., update-visitor-access-controls, manage-env-vars).

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness3/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single sentence listing operations. It is not overly long but could be more structured (e.g., using bullets or grouping). It is adequately concise but wastes the opportunity to add value.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness1/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the complex schema with 9 operations, many parameters, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the selectSchema router pattern, differentiate operations, or describe return behavior. A detailed description is critical here.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters2/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The description adds no meaning beyond the schema. The schema has low coverage (0% as per signal) but includes some inline descriptions for nested parameters (e.g., projectNameSearchValue). The description merely lists operation names, failing to explain the selectSchema structure or how to choose parameters.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description states the purpose: 'Select and run one of the following Netlify operations'. It lists the operations, making it clear it's a dispatch tool for project-related actions. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like netlify-team-services or netlify-user-services, missing an opportunity to clarify scope.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings or alternatives. The description just lists operations without context about typical use cases, prerequisites, or when to avoid it.

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

• netlify-coding-rulesB
  3/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It only states it is a required step but does not disclose what the tool does (e.g., retrieve rules, set configuration, or have side effects). Missing critical behavioral context.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is brief (two sentences) and front-loads the imperative 'ALWAYS call'. It is concise, though it could be more informative without being verbose.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a tool described as 'required step', the description lacks details on output, side effects, and how it integrates with subsequent operations. No output schema exists, so the description should compensate. It does not.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters1/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The description does not mention the single parameter 'creationType' or explain its enum values. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should provide meaning, but it adds nothing, leaving the agent to infer from enum names alone.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states this is a required preliminary step for serverless/Netlify coding, distinguishing it from sibling tools focused on services. The verb 'call' and resource 'coding-rules' are implied.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Explicitly says 'ALWAYS call when writing serverless or Netlify code' and identifies it as a required step before creating or editing functions. No alternatives mentioned, but the directive is clear.

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