mcp_list_active

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

No annotations, so the description carries the burden, but for a zero-parameter listing tool there is little to disclose. 'List ... currently connected' implies a read-only, non-destructive operation and indicates what is returned; however it does not state auth requirements, whether the listing is cached, or any rate limits.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. The core action and scope are stated immediately with nothing wasted.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by stating what is returned (connected servers and their tools). For a simple no-arg listing tool this is nearly complete; only the boundary against mcp_discover remains unaddressed.

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?

The tool takes no parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to convey. Baseline for a zero-parameter tool is 4, and the schema (empty object) is consistent with the description's implicit claim of no inputs.

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?

Clear specific verb 'List' with a precise resource: 'currently connected MCP servers and their tools'. An agent can distinguish it from most siblings, but the description does not explicitly contrast it with near-neighbors like mcp_discover (unconnected servers) or mcp_server_info (single server).

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 when-to-use guidance and no alternatives named. The 'currently connected' qualifier implicitly suggests it differs from discovery, but the agent must infer when to pick this over mcp_discover or mcp_server_info.

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