NewRelic 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 mentions the tool 'Returns condition details including NRQL query, thresholds, and configuration,' which adds some behavioral context about output. However, it lacks details on permissions, rate limits, pagination (beyond the 'limit' parameter), or whether it's a read-only operation, which is insufficient for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 efficiently states the purpose, filtering options, and return details. It is front-loaded with the core function and wastes no words, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 partially compensates by specifying return details. However, for a tool with 4 parameters and complex filtering, it lacks information on error handling, authentication needs, or example outputs, leaving gaps in context 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%, so the schema fully documents all parameters. The description adds marginal value by summarizing filtering options ('by policy, name, or enabled status'), but doesn't provide additional semantics beyond what the schema already specifies, such as format details or usage examples.

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 ('NewRelic NRQL alert conditions') with specific filtering options. It distinguishes from siblings like 'list_alert_policies' by focusing on conditions rather than policies, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from other list tools like 'list_dashboards' or 'list_entity_types' beyond the resource type.

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 through the mention of 'optional filtering by policy, name, or enabled status,' suggesting when to apply filters. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_alert_policies' or 'execute_nrql_query' for related data, and no exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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