question_market

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

No annotations are provided, but the description makes clear this is an informational tool (overview, lists, links). It discloses the behavioral trait of being read-only and non-destructive, which is sufficient given the tool's simple nature.

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 sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's purpose and content. It is front-loaded and contains no extraneous 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?

Despite having no output schema, the description adequately specifies what the tool provides: an overview, tools list, onboarding flow, and links. This is complete for a meta-tool that serves as an introduction.

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 input schema has zero properties, and schema description coverage is 100%. With no parameters, the description does not need to add parameter meaning. The baseline score of 4 is appropriate.

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 it provides an overview of the question.market MCP server, including available tools, onboarding flow, and links. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_market or list_markets which are specific operations.

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 use when an agent needs server-wide context, but does not provide explicit when-not instructions or alternatives. The usage is contextually implied but lacks direct guidance.

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