Opengraph io MCP

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden but only vaguely mentions 'custom question and response structure' without detailing behavioral traits like authentication needs, rate limits, error handling, or what the response entails. It fails to disclose critical operational aspects for a query tool.

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 sentence that is front-loaded and efficient, with no wasted words. However, it could be more structured by explicitly separating purpose from usage, but it earns high marks for brevity.

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 complexity of a query tool with 3 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain return values, error cases, or how the 'responseStructure' parameter works, leaving significant gaps for agent understanding.

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 parameters like 'site' as a URI and 'query' as a string. The description adds minimal value by hinting at 'custom question and response structure' but doesn't elaborate on parameter usage or semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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 the tool 'Query a site with a custom question and response structure using the OG Query endpoint,' which provides a general purpose (querying a site) but lacks specificity about what 'OG Query' means or what distinguishes it from siblings like getOgData or getOgScrapeData. It mentions a 'custom question and response structure' but doesn't clarify the verb or resource uniquely.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as getOgData or getOgScrapeData. The description implies usage for custom queries but doesn't specify contexts, exclusions, or prerequisites, leaving the agent without clear direction.

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