blogger-mcp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool resolves a Blog ID from a URL, implying a read-only lookup operation, but doesn't describe error handling (e.g., for invalid URLs), performance characteristics, authentication needs, or what happens if the blog doesn't exist. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Resolve a Blog ID from a blog URL') and includes a helpful example. There is zero waste—every word earns its place.

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 the tool's simplicity (1 parameter, no output schema) and lack of annotations, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the resolved Blog ID is used for, how it's returned, or potential errors. For a lookup tool in a blog management context, more context about the ID's purpose or integration with other tools would be helpful.

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 schema has 1 parameter with 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning by specifying that the 'url' parameter should be a blog URL (e.g., 'https://xxx.blogspot.com'), which clarifies the expected format beyond the schema's generic string type. However, it doesn't detail constraints like URL validation rules or supported domains.

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: 'Resolve a Blog ID from a blog URL'. It specifies the verb ('resolve') and resource ('Blog ID'), and provides an example URL format. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_blogs' or 'get_post', which could also involve blog identification.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, when-not-to-use scenarios, or compare it to siblings like 'list_blogs' (which might list blogs without URL resolution) or 'get_post' (which might retrieve posts rather than blog metadata).

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