qune-tech/ocds-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and adds valuable behavioral context: it specifies the return format ('summary of each profile without description'), ordering ('by creation date'), and that it lists all profiles (no filtering). It does not mention pagination, rate limits, or permissions, but covers key operational details adequately.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core action ('List all company profiles') and efficiently adds critical details about returns and ordering. Every word earns its place with zero waste.

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 tool's simplicity (0 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description is nearly complete: it explains what the tool does, what it returns, and ordering. It lacks minor details like error handling or exact summary fields, but for a list operation, this is sufficient for an agent to use it correctly.

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?

There are 0 parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately focuses on behavior rather than inputs, earning a baseline score of 4 for not adding unnecessary param info.

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 ('company profiles'), specifies the scope ('all'), and distinguishes from siblings like get_company_profile (which retrieves a single profile) by emphasizing it returns multiple summaries. It's specific and avoids tautology.

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 for retrieving multiple profiles in summary form, but does not explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives like get_company_profile (for detailed single profile) or search_text (for filtering). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, leaving usage context somewhat implied.

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