PocketBase MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'optional filtering and pagination' which hints at list behavior, but fails to disclose critical details like authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or what the output looks like (e.g., JSON array with metadata). For a read operation with 7 parameters, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 ('List records from a collection') and adds key capabilities ('with optional filtering and pagination'). Every word earns its place with zero redundancy or fluff.

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 complexity (7 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain the return format, error handling, or authentication needs. While the schema covers parameters well, the lack of behavioral context and output information makes this incomplete for an AI agent to use confidently.

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 all parameters are documented in the schema itself. The description adds no specific parameter semantics beyond implying filtering and pagination capabilities, which are already covered by the 'filter', 'page', and 'perPage' parameters in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 verb ('List') and resource ('records from a collection'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes this as a read operation from siblings like pb_records_create or pb_records_delete, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with pb_records_get (which likely retrieves a single record).

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 mentions 'optional filtering and pagination' which implies usage for retrieving multiple records, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like pb_records_get (for single records) or pb_collections_list (for collections themselves). No prerequisites or exclusions are stated.

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