sweipe_list_demosList ready-made demo sites available for import, showing slug, name, category, and required plugins to help choose a demo.
The ready-made demo sites this licence can import (slug, name, description, category, required plugins). Use sweipe_import_demo with a slug.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| refresh | No | Bypass the cached list. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose that the tool is read-only, nor does it mention caching behavior despite the 'refresh' parameter implying a cache. The agent is left to infer safety and side effects, which is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation support.
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?
A single, information-dense sentence that front-loads the purpose, lists the return fields, and names the companion tool. There is no extraneous text or repetition of schema details.
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 list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essentials: what it returns, what it's for, and how to proceed. The only minor gap is the absence of explanation about when to use the 'refresh' parameter, though the schema covers its function.
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%: the only parameter 'refresh' is fully described as 'Bypass the cached list.' The description adds no additional meaning about the parameter, so it relies entirely on the schema, which is the baseline case.
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 clear verb ('list') and resource ('ready-made demo sites'), and specifies the fields returned. It also names the companion tool sweipe_import_demo, distinguishing it from siblings like sweipe_status or sweipe_ai_library. This makes the tool's purpose unambiguous.
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?
The description provides explicit guidance on when to use the tool: to see available demos, and directs the agent to use sweipe_import_demo with a slug for the next step. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, but the alternative is clearly named and the context is evident.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.