followupboss-mcp-server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight. It implies a read-only operation ('get'), but doesn't disclose error handling, authentication needs, rate limits, or what happens if the ID is invalid. For a tool with no annotations, this leaves significant gaps.

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 extremely concise at four words, front-loaded with the core purpose, and has zero wasted words. It's efficiently structured for a simple tool.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It doesn't explain what 'get' entails (e.g., returns appointment details), potential errors, or usage context. Given the complexity of sibling tools in this server, more completeness is needed to guide an AI agent effectively.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'id' fully documented in the schema as 'Appointment ID'. The description adds no additional parameter context beyond implying the tool retrieves by ID, so it meets the baseline of 3 where the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Get an appointment by ID' clearly states the verb (get) and resource (appointment), but it's quite basic and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'getAppointmentOutcome' or 'getAppointmentType' which also retrieve appointment-related data. It's functional but minimal.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'listAppointments' or other get tools. The description only states what it does, not when it's appropriate or what prerequisites might exist (e.g., needing a valid appointment ID).

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