Refgrow MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight. It implies a read operation ('Get details') but doesn't disclose permissions, rate limits, error handling, or return format. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that likely interacts with sensitive 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 a single, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose ('Get details for a specific coupon'), making it immediately clear and appropriately sized for a simple tool.

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, no output schema, and a simple input schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks context on what 'details' include, error scenarios (e.g., invalid ID), or behavioral traits like idempotency, leaving the agent with insufficient information for reliable 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%, so the schema already documents the 'id' parameter as an integer. The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying it retrieves details for that ID, aligning with the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 action ('Get details') and resource ('a specific coupon by its ID'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_coupons' or 'get_affiliate_details' beyond the resource name, missing explicit sibling distinction.

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 doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a coupon ID), contrast with 'list_coupons' for browsing, or specify use cases like retrieving details for a known coupon.

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