Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• spruthub_get_method_schemaA
  3.7/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  The description discloses the output contents (parameters, return type, examples), giving some behavioral context. However, it does not mention authentication, error cases, side effects, or safety guarantees, and no annotations exist to cover these aspects.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single sentence that front-loads the action and resource, with no unnecessary words. It is concise and directly communicates the tool's core function.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  The description covers the tool's purpose and partially explains the return content, but it lacks explicit guidance on when to use it relative to sibling tools and does not specify the return structure beyond listing included elements. Given the simple one-parameter interface, it is adequate but not enriched.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The input schema already provides complete coverage with a description and examples for methodName. The tool description adds no parameter-specific semantics, but the schema is sufficient on its own.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description uses a specific verb 'Get' and a distinct resource 'detailed schema for a specific Sprut.hub API method'. It clearly differentiates this tool from siblings like spruthub_list_methods (which lists all methods) and spruthub_call_method (which invokes a method) by focusing on a single method's schema.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies usage for retrieving a method's schema before calling it, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over spruthub_list_methods or how it relates to spruthub_call_method. No exclusions or alternative tools are mentioned.

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

• spruthub_list_methodsA
  4/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool lists methods and includes categories/descriptions, but does not mention that it is read-only, whether there is pagination, or how filtering behaves for invalid categories. It adds only the basic facts without deeper context.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single sentence that is front-loaded with the action ('List') and resource. Every word adds value: 'all', 'available', 'categories', 'descriptions'. There is no fluff or redundancy.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a simple list tool with one optional filter and no output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool returns (methods with categories and descriptions). It could mention that this is the starting point before using get_method_schema or call_method, but given the simplicity, it is nearly complete.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100% for the single optional parameter 'category', which already explains its purpose and allowed values. The description adds no parameter-specific information, so it neither improves nor detracts from the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the verb 'List', the resource 'Sprut.hub JSON-RPC API methods', and the scope 'with their categories and descriptions'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools (get_method_schema and call_method) by focusing on enumeration rather than details or invocation.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides clear context: this tool lists all available methods. While it doesn't explicitly mention when to use it over siblings, the purpose is self-evident as a discovery/listing tool. There are no exclusions or alternative recommendations, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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

• spruthub_call_methodA
  4.2/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. It discloses the prerequisite schema requirement and warns against guessing, but does not mention potential side effects, return value, or error behavior of executing arbitrary methods. This is partial transparency.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is three short sentences, with purpose stated first and critical warnings highlighted with 'IMPORTANT.' Every sentence earns its place, and there is no redundant information.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  As a generic executor, the description provides the essential workflow (call schema first) and is complemented by sibling tools for listing and schema retrieval. It omits return value and error details, but these are likely found via the method schema, so the description is adequate if not exhaustive.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100%, with both 'methodName' and 'parameters' clearly documented, including examples and the requirement to consult the schema. The tool description adds no new parameter semantics beyond reinforcing the same instructions found in the schema.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states 'Execute any Sprut.hub JSON-RPC API method' with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like spruthub_list_methods and spruthub_get_method_schema. It is unambiguous about the tool's role.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines5/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Explicitly instructs 'You MUST call spruthub_get_method_schema first' and 'Never guess parameters,' giving clear when-to-use and when-not-to-guess guidance. This is directly actionable for an agent.

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