Search MCP Servers

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

Annotations contain only a title, no read-only or destructive hints, so the description carries the full burden. It simply restates the action without disclosing behavioral traits such as filtering behavior, result ordering, pagination, or any side effects. The output schema provides some structure but no behavioral context.

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundant information. Every word contributes to the statement of purpose.

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 presence of an output schema covers return values, but the description lacks usage context and behavioral detail. It is a minimal viable description for a simple search tool, but not rich enough to fully guide an agent in all contexts.

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 each parameter having a description. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, which already documents 'limit', 'search', 'category', and 'is_hosted'. Therefore the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('MCP servers on ModelScope'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling search tools (search_models, search_datasets, etc.) and the detail tool (get_mcp_server_detail). It states exactly what the tool does.

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 implies its usage as a search tool for MCP servers, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it vs. alternatives, no exclusions, and no mention of related tools like get_mcp_server_detail for details. The context is clear but underdeveloped.

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