get_chkp_mcp_server_prompts

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

The description mentions it 'Connects to the specified MCP server via stdio' and 'retrieves all available prompts,' providing some insight into the operation. However, with no annotations, it doesn't disclose potential side effects like package installation or process behavior, which are relevant for a tool that executes an NPM package.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and uses concise language. No unnecessary details.

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?

The tool is simple with a single parameter and a likely output schema covering return values. The description explains the purpose and connection method, making it sufficiently complete for the agent. It lacks prerequisites or error scenarios, but these are not critical given the simplicity.

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 input schema already has 100% coverage of the single parameter package_name, including an example. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so it meets the baseline.

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 it 'Get all prompts from a CheckPoint MCP server' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_chkp_mcp_server_tools and get_chkp_mcp_server_documentation by focusing on prompts.

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 clear context that this tool is for retrieving prompts from a specified MCP server via stdio. However, it doesn't explicitly mention when to use it over sibling tools, though the name itself is self-explanatory.

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