wzrdbrain MCP Server

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Adds valuable behavioral constraint ('Validated against known categories') but omits safety profile (read-only status), error handling for invalid categories, and rate limit characteristics.

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?

Front-loaded with clear purpose statement. 'Args' section efficiently documents the parameter without redundancy. Well-sized for tool complexity, though docstring format slightly deviates from conversational description style.

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?

Adequate for low complexity (1 parameter, no nesting). Presence of output schema reduces burden on description. Could strengthen by mentioning relationship to 'list_trick_categories' for category discovery, but sufficient for correct invocation.

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?

Excellent compensation for 0% schema description coverage. Provides concrete examples ('pivot', 'slide') and validation rules ('Validated against known categories') that the schema completely lacks, giving necessary semantic context for the string parameter.

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?

Clear specific verb ('Retrieves') + resource ('tricks') + scope ('by category'). Distinctly differs from sibling 'list_trick_categories' (which lists category metadata) by targeting trick data, and from 'generate_skating_combo' (creation vs retrieval).

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?

Implies usage through naming and 'category' parameter, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use versus siblings. Missing cross-reference to 'list_trick_categories' for discovering valid category values before calling this tool.

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