MCP Infra Lens

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

Annotations correctly indicate this is a non-destructive write (readOnlyHint: false, destructiveHint: false) that accesses external resources (openWorldHint: true). The description adds domain context about establishing baselines for anomaly detection but omits behavioral specifics like whether it overwrites existing baselines with the same label or that it requires SSH authentication.

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?

Single, efficient sentence with zero redundancy. Action and purpose are front-loaded, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

Explains the baseline concept adequately for anomaly detection workflows, but omits critical technical context given the tool's complexity: it does not mention SSH connectivity, remote server monitoring, or the authentication methods (password vs key) available in the schema.

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?

With only 50% schema description coverage (the nested 'connection' object lacks a top-level description), the description fails to compensate by explaining the SSH connection requirement or the purpose of the 'label' parameter for organizing baselines. No mention of parameters despite their complexity.

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?

Specific verb 'Record' and clear resource 'metrics as baseline'. The phrase 'during normal operation' and 'for anomaly detection later' effectively distinguishes this from sibling 'compare_to_baseline' (which would compare) and 'analyze_server' (which analyzes current state). Could be improved by mentioning the remote server aspect implied by the parameters.

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?

Provides implicit usage guidance with 'during normal operation' indicating when to invoke, but lacks explicit when-NOT-to-use conditions or comparison to siblings like 'snapshot' or 'analyze_server' which might also record state.

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