Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• perplexity_market_signalsA
  4.9/5.0
  Behavior5/5

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

  Annotations already mark readOnlyHInt and non-destructive, and the description adds meaningful behavior beyond that: it returns an empty list rather than fabricated signals, treating that empty result as a valid sweep outcome. It also discloses exact error behaviors for 401, 429, and per-answer parsing failures while preserving raw content, which is highly transparent.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is well-structured with Args, Returns, Examples, and Error Handling sections. The core purpose and sibling differentiation are front-loaded, and each section contributes actionable information without filler.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  There is no output schema, so the description correctly takes responsibility for explaining both Markdown and JSON return shapes. It also covers error handling, empty-result semantics, and representative use cases, giving an agent everything needed to invoke and interpret the tool correctly.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100% and each parameter already has a description, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by specifying the exact Markdown and JSON return structures tied to response_format, and by giving concrete examples for profile, signal_types, and lookback_days. This is a modest but genuine increment over the schema.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Find recent, dated market signals ... relevant to a given professional profile and region, as a structured list.' It lists concrete signal categories and explicitly contrasts itself with a free-text Sonar query and with the sibling tool perplexity_company_news, so an agent can distinguish it without opening the schema.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines5/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  It provides explicit 'Use when' and 'Don't use when' guidance: use for 'weekly sector-wide sweep independent of any specific tracked company' and avoid when you want a specific company's news, routing to perplexity_company_news. This leaves no ambiguity about selection versus the sibling.

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

• perplexity_company_newsA
  5/5.0
  Behavior5/5

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

  Annotations already declare read-only and non-destructive; the description adds substantial behavioral context: it explains it wraps Perplexity's API, fixes prompt/section structure, maps lookback_days to recency buckets, emits 'Nothing to report' placeholders, and returns specific errors for bad API keys or rate limits. This goes well beyond the annotations and helps predict actual behavior.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is longer than average, but it is organized into clear, labeled sections (Args, Returns, Examples, Error Handling) with no filler. Every section contributes decision-relevant information, and the main purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness5/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  The tool is a wraper with no output schema, so the description correctly takes on the burden of documenting return values, error behavior, parameter semantics, and usage boundaries. It covers the full range of invocation contexts and likely failure modes.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters5/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Although schema description coverage is 100%, the description adds important meaning beyond the schema: it explains that lookback_days is mapped to Perplexity's nearest recency bucket because no native '3 months' filter exists. It also details what each response_format value produces, including the JSON shape and Markdown sections.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Get a structured, cited news brief on one company,' then lists the exact content areas covered. It also names the sibling tool in the alternatives, making differentiation explicit.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines5/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description gives explicit 'Use when' and 'Don't use when' guidance, including an example user query mapped to the organization parameter. It clearly directs agents to perplexity_market_signals for sector-wide signals instead.

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