Digikala MCP Server

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

Annotations already declare this as read-only, non-destructive, idempotent, and open-world. The description adds valuable behavioral context about the AI-powered semantic nature, domain specialization, and query format preferences (2-3 word visual descriptions), which goes beyond what annotations provide.

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?

Three tightly focused sentences with zero waste. The first establishes the core function, the second provides domain and usage guidance, and the third explains capabilities. Every sentence earns its place.

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 has comprehensive annotations, 100% schema coverage, and an output schema exists, the description provides excellent contextual completeness. It explains the AI/semantic nature, domain specialization, and query approach that aren't captured in structured fields.

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 fully documents both parameters. The description reinforces the query format guidance ('2-3 word visual descriptions') but doesn't add significant semantic meaning beyond what's in the schema descriptions.

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 tool performs 'AI-powered semantic search using Text-Lenz' with specific domain focus on 'clothing, accessories, wearables, and shoes'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'search_products' by emphasizing the AI/semantic nature and visual description approach.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool: 'Exceptional for clothing, accessories, wearables, and shoes' and 'Use 2-3 word visual descriptions'. The description also distinguishes this from other search approaches by noting it 'understands natural language and context'.

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