MapleStory MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool retrieves information, implying a read-only operation, but doesn't clarify aspects like rate limits, authentication needs, error handling, or data freshness. The mention of 'basic information' hints at limited scope, but specifics like pagination or response format are omitted.

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 purpose without unnecessary details. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's function, making it appropriately sized and well-structured for quick comprehension.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimal but adequate for a read-only tool. It covers the core purpose but lacks details on behavioral traits, error cases, or output format. For a tool with 3 parameters and full schema coverage, it meets the minimum viable threshold but leaves gaps in usage context.

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%, so the schema fully documents parameters (guildName, worldName, date). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond implying guild lookup, which the schema already covers. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting, but the description doesn't compensate with extra context like default behavior for the optional date.

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 ('retrieve') and resource ('MapleStory guild'), specifying what information is obtained ('basic information including level, members, and skills'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_guild_ranking' by focusing on guild details rather than rankings, but doesn't explicitly contrast with other guild-related tools since none exist in the sibling list.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the description implies it's for guild information, it doesn't mention prerequisites, limitations, or compare it to other tools like 'get_character_basic_info' for character data. The agent must infer usage from the name and description alone.

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