Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• quasar_get_componentA
  4.5/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Discloses return formats (markdown and JSON), parameter behavior (aliases, normalization), and error responses. No side effects mentioned, but as a read-only getter, transparency is adequate given no annotations.

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

  Conciseness5/5

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

  Well-structured with sections (Args, Returns, Examples, Errors), front-loaded purpose, and no redundant sentences. Each part adds value.

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

  Completeness5/5

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

  Covers purpose, parameters, return details, errors, and examples fully. Without an output schema, the description compensates by detailing both markdown and JSON structures.

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

  Parameters4/5

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

  Adds significant value beyond schema: describes accepted formats (with/without prefix, aliases) and details JSON return structure. Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but extra context raises score.

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

  Purpose5/5

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

  Description clearly states 'Get documentation for a specific Quasar UI component' with a specific verb and resource. It differentiates from sibling tools like 'quasar_get_page' which retrieves page docs, making purpose distinct.

  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?

  Provides explicit usage context with examples and error handling ('Returns Component not found with suggestions'). Does not explicitly exclude alternatives but implies focus on component retrieval.

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

• quasar_get_pageA
  4.6/5.0
  Behavior5/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses input parameters, return formats (markdown/JSON with structure), error handling ('Page not found' with suggestions), and automatic index.md resolution for directory paths. This fully informs the agent of 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.

  Conciseness4/5

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

  The description is well-structured with clear sections (Args, Returns, Examples, Errors) and is front-loaded with the main purpose. It could be slightly more concise, but every sentence adds value. The organization aids quick scanning.

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

  Completeness5/5

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

  Given the tool's simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema), the description is complete. It covers return values, error cases, and examples. No critical information is missing for an agent to correctly invoke the tool.

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

  Parameters4/5

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

  Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by providing extensive examples for the 'path' parameter and explains the 'response_format' in detail, including the JSON return structure. This goes beyond the schema's simple type/enum descriptions.

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

  Purpose5/5

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

  The description clearly states it retrieves a Quasar documentation page by path. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying 'Use this for non-component documentation like style guides, plugins, CLI docs, getting started guides, etc.' This explicitly contrasts with quasar_get_component, which presumably handles component-specific docs.

  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?

  The description provides clear guidance on when to use this tool (non-component docs) and implicitly contrasts with siblings via examples. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the context with sibling tool names makes the usage boundaries reasonably clear.

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

• quasar_list_sectionsA
  4.8/5.0
  Behavior5/5

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

  With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: it details two distinct modes (listing sections vs. listing pages), specifies return formats (markdown and JSON), and explains error behavior (returns available sections on invalid section name).

  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 well-organized with clear sections (Args, Returns, Examples, Errors) and is front-loaded with the main purpose. While slightly verbose, every sentence serves a purpose.

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

  Completeness5/5

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

  For a tool with no output schema, it thoroughly documents both markdown and JSON return structures for both usage modes. It covers all parameters, provides multiple examples, and addresses error handling. No gaps remain.

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

  Parameters4/5

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

  Although schema coverage is 100%, the description adds value by explaining each parameter's role with examples and default values. It clarifies how section works as an optional filter and describes response_format with enum options.

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

  Purpose5/5

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

  The description clearly states it lists all Quasar documentation sections or pages within a section. It distinguishes from siblings (quasar_get_component, quasar_get_page, quasar_search_docs) by focusing on navigation and discovery rather than retrieving specific content.

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

  Usage Guidelines5/5

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

  The description explicitly says 'Use this to discover what documentation is available and navigate the docs structure.' It provides concrete examples for listing all sections, listing pages in a section, and even error handling when a specified section doesn't exist.

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

• quasar_search_docsA
  4.8/5.0
  Behavior5/5

  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 comprehensively discloses behavior: pagination (limit, offset, has_more, next_offset), optional deep content search (include_content), error messages ('No results found', invalid section), and return format details. This covers all critical traits for effective use.

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

  Conciseness5/5

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

  The description is well-structured with labeled sections (Args, Returns, Examples, Errors), front-loaded with the core purpose, and each sentence adds value. It is appropriately sized for the complexity (6 parameters, pagination, two output formats) and does not include unnecessary repetition or filler.

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

  Completeness5/5

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

  Given no output schema, the description fully compensates by detailing the return structure for both markdown and JSON, including fields like total, has_more, snippet, score. It covers pagination, error handling, and provides comprehensive examples. The tool is search-based with moderate complexity, and the description addresses all necessary context for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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

  Parameters5/5

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

  Schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds significant value beyond the schema. It lists parameters with their roles, provides examples of usage, explains the effect of include_content, details the return structure for both markdown and JSON, and specifies default values and constraints. The examples alone (e.g., 'Find button docs: query="btn"') greatly enhance understanding.

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

  Purpose5/5

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

  The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Search the Quasar documentation for topics, components, or features.' It uses a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('Quasar documentation'), and the action is distinct from sibling tools (quasar_get_component, quasar_get_page) which retrieve individual items rather than searching.

  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?

  The description provides clear context for when to use this tool (searching documentation) through examples and parameter descriptions. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or state when not to use it (e.g., when you know the exact component name, prefer quasar_get_component). The examples implicitly cover various use cases but lack explicit exclusion guidance.

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