followupboss-mcp-server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It implies a read-only operation ('get'), but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like authentication needs, rate limits, error responses (e.g., for non-existent deals), or data format returned. This leaves critical gaps for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 with zero waste. It's front-loaded and appropriately sized for a simple tool, though it could be more informative without sacrificing brevity.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and a simple input schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what a 'deal' entails in this context, what data is returned, or error conditions. For a retrieval tool, this lacks necessary context for reliable use by an agent.

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 parameter 'id' documented as 'Deal ID'. The description adds no meaning beyond this, merely restating 'by ID'. Since the schema fully covers the parameter, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate—adequate but no extra value.

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 a deal by ID' clearly states the action (get) and resource (deal), but it's vague about what 'get' entails—whether it retrieves full details, summary, or specific fields. It distinguishes from siblings like 'createDeal' and 'updateDeal' by being a read operation, but doesn't specify how it differs from 'listDeals' or other retrieval tools.

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a valid deal ID), compare to 'listDeals' for bulk retrieval, or specify error handling for invalid IDs. The description assumes context without explicit usage instructions.

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