NewRelic MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool lists accounts based on the current API key and indicates the configured account, which is useful behavioral context. However, it does not mention potential limitations like rate limits, pagination, or error handling, leaving gaps 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 front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by additional details in a second sentence. It is appropriately sized with no wasted words, efficiently conveying necessary information in two concise sentences.

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 provides basic purpose and some behavioral context but lacks details on return format, error cases, or dependencies. For a simple list tool with zero parameters, it is adequate but could be more complete by specifying output structure or limitations.

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?

The tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema fully documents the inputs. The description does not need to add parameter details, and it appropriately focuses on the tool's purpose and output semantics without redundancy. Baseline is 4 for zero parameters.

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 accounts accessible with the current API key'), specifying it shows account IDs, names, and the currently configured account. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'list_entity_types' or 'list_dashboards' by focusing specifically on accounts.

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 when needing to see accessible accounts and the current configuration, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_entity' or 'search_entity_with_tag'. It provides some context but lacks explicit guidance on exclusions or comparisons.

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