contabo_reference

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is already covered; the description adds substantive behavioral detail beyond that, namely the two operating modes and exactly what content each returns (types, required fields, enums, defaults, descriptions, exact input JSON Schema). It stops short of noting any limits on output size or pagination, but it is well above the annotation baseline.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler, with the core purpose front-loaded before the usage instructions. Every clause carries information.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must cover return content, and it does, enumerating the fields returned in full-documentation mode. For a two-parameter, read-only lookup tool this leaves nothing an agent needs missing.

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 both parameters are already documented in the schema, including the note that omitting operation lists all operations. The description restates the same domain/domain+operation combination rather than adding syntax, format, or naming rules, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific resource (documentation for every Contabo MCP operation) and a specific action (list operations or fetch full parameter docs), making it clearly distinct from all sibling tools, which are the actual operation tools. An agent can immediately tell this is the meta/discovery tool rather than an action tool.

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?

It gives explicit mode-based usage: pass a domain to enumerate operations, pass domain + operation for full parameter docs. That is clear context for how to invoke it, though it never explicitly says to call this before the sibling operation tools or when not to use it.

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