Tencent Cloud Live MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight. It states the action is 'disable' but doesn't clarify if this is reversible, requires specific permissions, affects ongoing streams, or has side effects. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient disclosure.

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 brief and structured with Args/Returns sections, but the core description '禁用域名' is overly terse. It efficiently states the action and parameter, though it could benefit from a slightly more explanatory opening sentence without becoming verbose.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'disable' means operationally, what the return value '请求ID' (request ID) implies (e.g., for async tracking), or error conditions. Given the complexity of domain management and sibling tools, more context is needed.

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 the 'domain_name' parameter with an example. The description adds no additional meaning beyond restating the parameter name in Chinese ('推流域名' - push stream domain), which slightly clarifies it's for live streaming domains but doesn't provide format constraints or validation rules beyond the schema.

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 '禁用域名' (disable domain) which provides a basic verb+resource, but it's vague about what type of domain and what 'disable' entails. It doesn't distinguish from siblings like 'delete_live_domain' or 'enable_live_domain', leaving ambiguity about whether this is a temporary deactivation or permanent removal.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'delete_live_domain' or 'enable_live_domain'. The description lacks context about prerequisites, consequences, or typical use cases, leaving the agent with no usage differentiation from sibling tools.

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