Genji MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight. It hints at 'advanced normalization options' but doesn't explain what normalization entails, potential performance impacts, rate limits, or authentication needs. For a search tool with 10 parameters, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its behavior.

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 that front-loads the core purpose. It avoids redundancy and wastes no words, though it could be slightly more informative given the tool's complexity.

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?

For a search tool with 10 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what the search returns (e.g., text snippets, metadata), how normalization affects results, or any error conditions. The context signals indicate high complexity that isn't addressed.

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%, so the schema fully documents all 10 parameters. The description adds no specific parameter information beyond the generic mention of 'normalization options,' which loosely relates to some boolean parameters. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 action ('Search') and target resource ('classical Japanese texts'), and mentions the key feature ('advanced normalization options'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'genji_get_normalization_rules' and 'genji_preview_normalization' by being the primary search function, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with them.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention any prerequisites, constraints, or compare it to sibling tools like 'genji_get_normalization_rules' or 'genji_preview_normalization' for specific use cases.

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