mcp_blacklist_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered by structured data. The description adds genuine domain context — the canonical match key (protocol + host + port, or normalized url) — which explains how entries are identified. It still omits pagination/result-size behavior, so it is not fully transparent despite the lower annotated bar.

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 tight sentences with the purpose front-loaded and no filler. The trailing 'See docs/BLACKLIST.md' is a small dependency on external docs rather than self-contained information, which keeps it from being exceptional.

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?

For a zero-parameter read tool with readOnlyHint already given, the definition is close to sufficient. With no output schema, though, it does not describe the returned entry shape (fields, ordering, pagination), leaving an agent to guess what comes back.

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; nothing in the schema needs compensating for. The mention of the match key adds interpretation value even though there is no parameter to describe.

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 verb and resource: 'List operator blacklist entries.' This clearly separates it from the sibling write operations mcp_blacklist_add and mcp_blacklist_remove, though it never names them explicitly.

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?

Usage is implied by the verb 'List' — an agent knows to call it to inspect the blacklist. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives (e.g. mcp_query_by_protocol for filtered lookups), and no exclusions or prerequisites.

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