nocobase-mcp-server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the shallow retrieval behavior and that the node itself is excluded, which is useful. However, it lacks details on permissions, error handling, or response format, leaving gaps for a tool with no output schema.

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 purpose and key constraints. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or unnecessary details.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is adequate for a simple read operation but incomplete. It covers the shallow retrieval scope but lacks information on return values, error cases, or system behavior, which could hinder agent usage.

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% for the single parameter 'uid', so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying that 'uid' refers to a 'UI schema node', providing context beyond the schema's 'UI schema UID', but does not elaborate on format or constraints.

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 'Get' and the resource 'direct child properties of a UI schema node', specifying the scope 'by UID (shallow, without the node itself)'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_page' (full page) and 'get_parent_schema' (parent node) by emphasizing shallow retrieval of only child properties.

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 implies usage context by specifying 'shallow, without the node itself', suggesting this tool is for retrieving child properties when the node itself is not needed. However, it does not explicitly state when to use alternatives like 'get_page' or 'get_parent_schema', nor provide exclusion criteria.

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