reference-mcp-setup

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral context. It describes a read operation ('Get'), which is non-destructive, but does not elaborate on aspects like response format, side effects, or dependencies. The behavior is straightforward, but minimal information is given.

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 sentence with no redundant information. It is concise and front-loaded, clearly stating the tool's purpose without extra 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?

Given the lack of parameters and output schema, the description provides essential information about what the tool delivers. It mentions both 'setup instructions' and 'usage patterns', which covers the expected content. However, it could have clarified the context of 'MCP server' slightly, but it is still adequate.

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?

There are no parameters, so the description does not need to add parameter semantics. The schema coverage is 100% trivially. The tool is simple, and the description provides sufficient context for its purpose without needing parameter details.

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 that the tool retrieves 'MCP server setup instructions and usage patterns' for Playwright Wizard. The verb 'Get' and resource 'setup instructions' are specific, and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools that focus on other aspects like core principles or selector strategies.

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 lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies usage for MCP server setup, but does not mention when not to use it or provide references to sibling tools. The usage context is implied but not directly stated.

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