tactual-mcp

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

No annotations provided, but description effectively discloses: 'Read-only, no side effects' for safety, return format ('JSON array of {targetId...}'), uniqueness constraint ('top unique'), and ranking logic ('ranked by severity'). Lacks error handling details but compensates well for missing annotations/output schema.

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?

Five sentences, zero waste. Front-loaded with purpose and return value, followed by safety, usage context, exclusion case, and input constraint. Every sentence provides unique information not redundant with schema or annotations.

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?

Comprehensive for a 2-parameter extraction tool. Compensates for lack of annotations by declaring read-only safety, and for lack of output schema by documenting return structure. Covers purpose, constraints, sibling relationships (analyze_url), and output format comprehensively.

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 has 100% coverage (baseline 3). Description adds crucial provenance context that the 'analysis' parameter 'must be a JSON string from analyze_url (format='json')', which is essential for correct invocation. Could add detail about maxSuggestions behavior (e.g., if fewer exist than requested).

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?

States specific verb 'Extract' with resource 'remediation suggestions from a Tactual analysis result' and operation 'ranked by severity'. Clearly distinguishes from SARIF workflows by stating redundancy, and explicitly links to sibling analyze_url as the required input source.

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?

Explicitly states when to use ('Most useful with large JSON results where you want a prioritized shortlist'), when not to use ('For SARIF results... this tool is redundant'), and prerequisites ('Input must be a JSON string from analyze_url'). Names specific alternative handling (SARIF inline suggestions).

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