texterify-mcp

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

Adds substantial context beyond annotations: explains partial update behavior (omitted fields stay as-is), documents return value structure ({"message": "Key updated"}) and notes it doesn't return full object, and clarifies scope limitations. Annotations cover destructive/idempotent hints; description adds operational details.

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?

Three dense sentences with zero waste: 1) Purpose and scope, 2) Partial update semantics, 3) Critical distinctions (not translation update) and return value documentation. Every clause 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?

Comprehensive for a partial-update mutation tool: explains return values (compensating for missing output schema), documents side effects vs non-effects, and provides workflow guidance. Annotations handle safety classification; description handles operational details.

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 has 100% description coverage, so description appropriately relies on schema for parameter details. Mentions conceptual fields (name, description, HTML/pluralization) that map to parameters but doesn't duplicate parameter documentation, which is correct for high-coverage schemas.

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?

Uses specific verb 'Update' with clear resource 'translation key' and scope 'metadata'. Explicitly distinguishes from sibling tools by stating it operates on existing keys (vs create_key) and does NOT modify translations (directing to set_translation instead).

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?

Excellent guidance: explicitly names alternative tool 'set_translation' for changing translated content, explains partial update semantics ('Only the fields you provide are changed'), and provides follow-up workflow ('call get_key afterward if you need the updated key data').

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