Firefly III MCP Server

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotent status. The description adds valuable context about the return payload ('account names, balances, and types') which is crucial given the absence of an output schema. It does not contradict annotations.

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 consists of exactly two efficient sentences with zero waste. It front-loads the action and resource, immediately follows with the primary filtering capability, and concludes with return value information.

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 simple 3-parameter schema with no required fields and the absence of an output schema, the description adequately compensates by describing the return values. It could be improved by explicitly mentioning pagination behavior, but the schema descriptions for 'limit' and 'page' partially cover this.

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 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the 'type' parameter by calling it an 'optional type filter', but does not add significant semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides for 'limit' and 'page' parameters.

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 'accounts', and mentions the optional type filter capability. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this listing operation from the sibling tool 'firefly_get_account' (which likely retrieves a single account), potentially leaving ambiguity about when to use the list versus get operation.

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 phrase 'optional type filter' implies the tool can be used with or without filtering, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'firefly_get_account', nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions for usage.

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