Leadpipe MCP

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

The annotation 'readOnlyHint: true' already indicates this is a safe read operation. The description adds value by specifying what gets previewed (size and masked sample rows) and the purpose (before loading full results), but doesn't disclose additional behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication needs, or what 'masked' entails. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 core purpose. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or fluff, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 (5 parameters with nested objects, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It adequately covers the purpose and context but lacks details on parameters, return values, and behavioral nuances. The annotation helps with safety, but more is needed for a tool with this parameter richness.

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 and 5 parameters (including a complex nested 'filters' object), the description provides no parameter information beyond what's implied by the tool name. It doesn't explain what 'topicIds', 'minScore', or other parameters mean, failing to compensate for the low 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 clearly states the specific action ('preview audience size and masked sample rows') and distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'create_audience', 'export_audience', or 'get_audience_results' by emphasizing it's a preview before loading full results. It uses precise verbs ('preview') and specifies the resource ('audience').

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 ('before loading full results'), suggesting this tool is for preliminary assessment. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use alternatives like 'create_audience' or 'export_audience', nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions, leaving some guidance gaps.

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