DataForSEO 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 states the tool 'gets list of availible locations,' which implies a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as authentication needs, rate limits, pagination, or error handling. The description is minimal and lacks essential context for safe and effective use.

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 is front-loaded and efficient, with no wasted words. However, it contains a typo ('availible') and could be slightly more polished, but overall it's appropriately sized for its purpose.

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 incomplete. It doesn't explain what the output looks like (e.g., list format, data structure) or provide context on complexity. For a tool with 4 parameters and no structured output info, more detail is needed to guide the agent effectively.

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%, so the schema fully documents all 4 parameters with descriptions and constraints. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, as it doesn't explain parameter interactions or usage examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema handles parameter documentation.

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 states the tool is a 'Utility tool for serp_organic_live_advanced to get list of availible locations.' This clarifies it fetches location data for a specific sibling tool, but the purpose is somewhat vague—it doesn't specify what 'availible locations' means (e.g., search engine locations, geographic regions). It distinguishes from most siblings by focusing on locations, but lacks specificity in verb and resource.

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 mentions it's for 'serp_organic_live_advanced,' implying usage context, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., serp_youtube_locations or other location-related tools in the sibling list). There are no exclusions or prerequisites stated, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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