Jina AI Remote 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 provides minimal behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'for best results' and 'maximum 5 searches for optimal performance' (which is also in the schema), but doesn't describe what happens when searches complete, error handling, rate limits, authentication needs, or what format results return. For a parallel search tool with no annotations, this is inadequate.

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 appropriately sized with three sentences that each serve a purpose: stating the tool's function, providing usage guidance, and suggesting query generation methods. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and avoids unnecessary elaboration.

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 parallel search tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what results look like, how parallel execution works, error handling, or performance characteristics. The description should provide more context about the tool's behavior given the lack of structured metadata.

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 fully documents both parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema - it suggests 'provide multiple search queries that explore different research angles' which reinforces the 'searches' array parameter, but doesn't provide additional semantic context about parameter usage or interactions.

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 clearly states the tool 'runs multiple SSRN searches in parallel' for 'comprehensive social science research coverage', which is a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from its sibling 'search_ssrn' (which appears to be a single search tool) or 'parallel_search_arxiv' (which searches a different database), missing full sibling differentiation.

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 clear context for when to use this tool ('for comprehensive social science research coverage and diverse academic angles') and suggests using 'expand_query' to generate diverse queries. It implies this is for multiple parallel searches rather than single searches, but doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or name alternatives like 'search_ssrn'.

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