UnClick 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. It explains the tool's role as a generic endpoint caller and references discovery tools, but doesn't describe error handling, authentication requirements, rate limits, or what happens when endpoints fail. It provides basic context but lacks comprehensive behavioral details.

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 perfectly concise and well-structured with three sentences: a clear purpose statement, guidance on prerequisites, and a concrete example. Every sentence earns its place by providing essential information without redundancy.

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 this is a generic endpoint caller with 2 parameters, 100% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is reasonably complete. It explains the tool's purpose, provides usage guidance, and includes an example. However, without annotations or output schema, it could benefit from more behavioral context about what to expect from responses.

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 already fully documents both parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by mentioning example endpoint IDs and referencing unclick_tool_info for parameter details, but doesn't provide additional semantic context about parameter usage or constraints.

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 tool's purpose: 'Call any UnClick tool endpoint' with specific verbs ('call', 'specify') and resources ('UnClick tool endpoint', 'endpoint ID and parameters'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like unclick_search and unclick_tool_info by being the execution tool rather than a discovery tool.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives: 'Use unclick_search or unclick_tool_info to discover endpoint IDs and required params.' This clearly directs users to sibling tools for discovery before invoking this execution tool.

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