harden_config

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It does not disclose whether the tool modifies config, requires special permissions, or has side effects. 'One-click recommendations' hints at possible actions but is ambiguous.

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?

One sentence with no wasted words. Purpose is front-loaded and directly stated.

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?

For a simple analysis tool with one param and no output schema, the description covers basic purpose and output type. However, missing details on return structure, whether it takes action, or prerequisites for a security tool.

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?

Single parameter 'serverName' with no schema description. The description implies it identifies a server, but no format, validation, or default value info. Basic meaning is conveyed, but lacks detail.

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 verb ('analyze'), resource ('MCP server config'), and outcome ('A-F hardening grade with one-click recommendations'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like compliance_gap_analysis.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, such as compliance_gap_analysis or scan_security. Context of tool purpose is clear but no exclusions or prerequisites mentioned.

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