MCP cldkctl Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It fails to do so, offering no information about whether this is a read or write operation, permission requirements, side effects, or response format. The description does not add any context beyond the bare endpoint call, which is insufficient for a tool that likely modifies data.

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 overly concise to the point of being unhelpful, consisting of a single vague sentence. It is front-loaded but lacks substance, failing to earn its place by providing useful information. This under-specification makes it inefficient rather than appropriately concise.

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 editing roles (a mutation operation), the lack of annotations, no output schema, and a minimal description, this tool definition is incomplete. The description does not address critical aspects like what fields can be edited, error conditions, or security implications, making it inadequate for safe and effective use.

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%, with parameters 'role_id' and 'role_data' documented in the schema. The description adds no meaning beyond this, as it does not explain what 'role_data' contains or provide examples. However, the baseline is 3 since the schema adequately covers the parameters, though the description does not compensate for the nested object complexity.

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 'Call the cldkctl_org_role_edit endpoint' is a tautology that merely restates the tool name without explaining what it does. It lacks a specific verb and resource, failing to clarify that this tool edits organization roles. While sibling tools like 'cldkctl_org_role_add' and 'cldkctl_org_role_delete' exist, this description does not differentiate from them.

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 does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent with no information about appropriate usage scenarios. Given the presence of sibling tools for adding, deleting, and listing roles, this gap is significant.

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