nocobase-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 states this is a creation operation, implying mutation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like required permissions, whether it's idempotent, error handling, or side effects. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized and 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?

Given the complexity of creating a UI schema node, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral aspects, error cases, or what the tool returns, making it inadequate for an agent to use this tool effectively in a real-world scenario.

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?

The description adds minimal semantics beyond the input schema, which has 100% coverage. It mentions 'UI schema object to create (JSON)', aligning with the schema's description, but doesn't provide extra details like format examples or constraints. With high schema coverage, the baseline is 3, and the description doesn't significantly enhance understanding.

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 action ('Create') and the resource ('new root-level UI schema node in NocoBase'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'insert_new_schema' or 'update_ui_schema', which might have overlapping functionality, so it doesn't reach the highest score.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, such as needing specific permissions or existing schemas, or compare it to siblings like 'insert_new_schema' or 'update_ui_schema', leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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