Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• search-flightsC
  2/5.0
  Behavior1/5

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

  With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only states 'search for flights' and gives no information about read-only guarantees, side effects, authorization requirements, rate limits, or the nature of results. This is a significant gap for a tool with six required parameters.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness2/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is extremely concise ('search for flights'), but it is under-specifying rather than efficiently informative. A single vague phrase does not earn its place, and the structure provides no front-loaded useful details.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  The tool has six required parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, placing a high burden on the description to provide context. The description offers almost no beyond-schema value, leaving the agent uninformed about expected behavior, return format, or usage context.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100%, so all six parameters have descriptions in the schema itself. The tool description adds no additional parametric meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose3/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description 'search for flights' identifies the core action and resource (flights), making its basic purpose clear. However, it lacks any specificity about scope, constraints, or what distinguishes it from potential sibling tools, so it is only minimally adequate.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines1/5

  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 like 'search-hotels-by-coordinates' or 'today'. There are no mentions of context, prerequisites, or exclusions, so the agent receives no decision support.

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

• search-hotels-by-coordinatesC
  2.9/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'search for hotels', which implies a read operation but does not disclose any side effects, permissions, rate limits, or return format. This is minimal and adds little beyond the tool name.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single concise sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource. However, it is so terse that it sacrifices informative value for brevity, so not a perfect score.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  With 11 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is very incomplete. It does not explain what the search results contain, how the coordinates are used, or any behavior around the optional filters. The schema covers parameters but not overall tool context.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The input schema has 100% parameter coverage with descriptions for all 11 parameters, including formats and defaults. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so it does not enhance beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description states 'search for hotels by geographic coordinates', which clearly identifies the action (search), resource (hotels), and scope (by coordinates). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'search-flights' (hotels vs. flights) and 'today' (different domain). However, it lacks explicit mention of what 'search' returns (availability, prices, etc.), so it's not a full 5.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not explain scenarios or exclusions. The description simply states what it does without any context for selection.

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

• todayA
  4.4/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It clearly states the operation (retrieving the date) and implies no side effects or mutations. However, it omits details like timezone or format, which could be relevant in some contexts.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single, concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. Every word earns its place, with no unnecessary elaboration.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a tool with no parameters, no output schema, and a trivial function, the description is nearly complete. It fully conveys the action, though it leaves out output format details that could be assumed or discovered elsewhere.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The input schema has zero properties, and the baseline for parameter semantics with 0 params is 4. The description adds no param-specific meaning, but none is needed because there are no parameters to explain.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description 'get today's date' uses a specific verb and resource, making the tool's purpose unmistakable. It is clearly distinct from sibling tools like 'search-flights' and 'search-hotels-by-coordinates', which address different domains.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  While there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, the tool's purpose is self-evident and there are no competing date-related tools among siblings. The context signals show zero parameters, implying a trivial utility where no usage exclusions are needed.

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