get_server_details

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral info. It lists what the tool returns (install command, tool list, etc.) but does not mention side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or any other behavioral traits. Adequate but not complete.

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?

Single sentence that is concise and front-loaded with the action and resource. No wasted words, though additional structure (e.g., bullet points for return fields) could improve readability.

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 simple lookup tool with one parameter, the description provides sufficient context about input source and output fields. However, no output schema is provided, and the description lacks detail on response structure or error conditions, making it minimally complete.

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 coverage is 100% with description for the only parameter 'slug' already provided in the input schema. The description adds 'from search results' context, marginally adding value, but 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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Get', resource 'full details on a specific MCP server', and the unique identifier 'slug' derived from search results. It also lists the returned fields, distinguishing it from sibling tools like search_mcp_servers that return lists.

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?

Description explicitly instructs to obtain the slug from search results (search_mcp_servers), providing a clear prerequisite. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the context implies this tool is for detailed retrieval after search.

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