config

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

The description indicates that setup_reset clears credentials and config, which is a destructive action. However, annotations set destructiveHint=false, creating a direct contradiction. The score is 1 per the rule for contradictions.

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 concise, uses bullet points for actions, and efficiently communicates the tool's capabilities with no wasted words.

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?

Despite the contradiction, the description covers all actions and their effects adequately. It addresses edge cases (e.g., no mutable settings, no-op for cache_clear) and provides complete context for a config tool.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all parameters. The description adds context beyond the schema, such as explaining that set returns info because Notion has no mutable settings, and that cache_clear is a no-op.

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 the tool manages server configuration and credential state, and enumerates specific actions with their purposes. It distinguishes from sibling tools such as config__open_relay by covering multiple config operations.

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 context for each action (e.g., setup_start for triggering relay setup, setup_reset for clearing credentials). However, it does not explicitly guide when to use this tool over alternatives like config__open_relay, leaving some ambiguity.

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