Mikensey MCP Server

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true), but the description adds valuable context: it specifies the return format (episode list with id, guest, title, date, word count) and mentions pagination behavior via offset, which annotations don't provide.

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, followed by usage guidance and parameter details. Every sentence adds value: the first defines the tool, the second gives usage context, and the parameter/return sections provide essential operational info without redundancy.

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 read-only list tool with good annotations and no output schema, the description is complete: it explains what the tool does, when to use it, parameters, and return values. It compensates for the lack of output schema by specifying the return format, making it sufficient for agent use.

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 all parameters well. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by listing parameters with basic explanations, but doesn't provide additional syntax or format details. Baseline 3 is appropriate given high schema coverage.

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 ('all available podcast episodes') with specific attributes (guest names, dates, topics). It distinguishes from siblings like 'mikensey_get_episode' (singular) and 'mikensey_search' (likely more advanced filtering).

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 provides clear context for when to use ('browse what's available or find a specific episode'), but doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or name specific alternatives among siblings like 'mikensey_search' for more complex queries.

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