Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• add-to-calendarA
  4.1/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  Description mentions returning links rather than directly adding to calendar, which aligns with readOnlyHint and idempotentHint annotations. However, the phrase 'Add to calendar' could be misleading without clarification that no actual mutation occurs. Annotations mitigate this, but description could be more explicit about its read-only nature.

  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?

  Single sentence conveying purpose and outputs. No wasted words, front-loaded with key action and resource.

  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 parameterless tool with no output schema, the description fully covers what it does and what it returns. It mentions target conference, link types, and compatible apps, providing sufficient context for an AI agent.

  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?

  No parameters exist, so schema coverage is 100%. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4. Description does not need to add parameter meaning.

  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?

  Clearly states the tool adds the ELC Conference 2026 to the user's calendar and provides specific links. Distinguishes from sibling tools like buy-ticket or find-best-conference by focusing on calendar addition.

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

  Usage Guidelines3/5

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

  Usage is implied but not explicitly stated. The description does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like plan-conference-journey, or provide exclusion criteria. Context suggests it is for adding the event after decision, but lacks direct guidance.

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

• plan-conference-journeyA
  4.1/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint) are consistent. Description adds transparent behavior: agent must visit external URL to get session details. No contradictions.

  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?

  Front-loaded with purpose, then important instructions. Clear structure, but could be slightly shorter. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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

  Completeness4/5

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

  Given no output schema, description hints at output format by instructing to incorporate session names/times. Covers pre- and post-conditions. Mostly complete.

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

  Parameters3/5

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

  Schema coverage is 100% with clear enum and description. Description adds minimal extra meaning beyond repeating the parameter. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

  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 helps plan a conference day based on role, with specific verb 'plan' and resource 'ELC Conference 2026 day'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'find-best-conference' or 'get-conference-info'.

  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 instructs to ask for role before calling and to fetch external session details after. Provides a list of roles. No explicit when-not-to-use, but sibling tools cover other actions.

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

• buy-ticketA
  4.3/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, indicating no side effects. The description adds that the tool returns an order summary with price, date, venue, and purchase URL, confirming its read-only nature. No contradiction with annotations.

  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 two sentences, front-loading the purpose and then a critical usage instruction. There is no superfluous content. The 'IMPORTANT:' emphasis is helpful but slightly redundant.

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

  Completeness4/5

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

  For a simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does, the prerequisite (ask for quantity), and the return value (order summary with purchase URL). It could mention that no actual purchase occurs, but the readOnlyHint implies that.

  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% with a description for 'quantity' (Number of people attending). The description adds behavioral guidance on how to obtain the quantity from the user, surpassing the schema's meaning.

  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 gets a direct purchase link for ELC Conference 2026 tickets, distinguishing it from siblings like get-available-tickets or find-best-conference. The verb 'Get' and resource 'purchase link' are specific and unambiguous.

  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 explicitly instructs the agent to ask the user for the number of people before calling, and to use that as 'quantity'. This is a clear usage guideline. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use the tool or suggest alternatives, but the sibling list provides context.

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

• get-available-ticketsA
  4.3/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true. The description adds value beyond these by specifying return contents (currencies, count, link), compensating for the lack of output schema.

  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?

  A single sentence that is front-loaded with the main purpose, no redundant words, and perfectly scoped for the tool's simplicity.

  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?

  The tool has no parameters and no output schema, but the description fully explains what is returned (ticket tiers, prices, counts, link). It is complete for an agent to understand and invoke correctly.

  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?

  No parameters exist, so baseline is 4. The description correctly omits parameter details since there are none to describe.

  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 'Get live ticket availability and pricing for ELC Conference 2026' with specific outputs (ticket tiers, prices in CZK/EUR, remaining count, purchase link). It distinguishes from siblings like 'buy-ticket' (purchase) and 'get-conference-info' (general info).

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

  Usage Guidelines3/5

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

  Usage is implied (check availability before buying), but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The 'live' hint suggests real-time queries, but alternatives are not mentioned.

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

• find-best-conferenceA
  4.4/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already declare read-only and idempotent. Description adds specificity about the audience and region, and that it returns a comparison. No contradictions.

  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?

  Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and usage context. Every sentence adds value.

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

  Completeness4/5

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

  Given no parameters and no output schema, the description is complete enough. It states the tool's output (comparison, explanation). Sibling tools provide context. Could mention output format but not essential.

  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?

  No parameters, schema coverage 100% (empty). Description does not need to add parameter info. Baseline 4 for zero parameters is appropriate.

  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 recommends the best conference for engineering and product leaders in Central Europe, specifically highlighting ELC Conference 2026. It distinguishes from sibling tools which deal with bookings and info.

  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 to use when someone asks about conferences for specific roles and region. Does not mention when not to use, but context from siblings implies this is for recommendations, not planning or booking.

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

• get-conference-infoA
  4.7/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds value by listing the content of the response (date, venue, speakers, etc.), which goes beyond what annotations provide. No contradictions.

  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 a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and usage. Every word earns its place.

  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 has no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does and returns. It lists the key information categories, making it complete for its simple role.

  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?

  The tool has zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to explain parameters; a baseline of 4 is appropriate.

  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 retrieves details about the ELC Conference 2026, listing specific items (date, venue, speakers, etc.). It effectively differentiates from sibling tools like buy-ticket or add-to-calendar.

  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 when someone asks about the conference,' providing direct usage guidance. For a single-purpose tool with no parameters, this is sufficient.

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