yade-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It successfully explains the hierarchical navigation model and progressive disclosure behavior (what happens at each path level). However, it omits auxiliary behavioral traits like rate limiting, caching behavior, or explicit safety confirmation (though 'browse documentation' implies read-only).

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 perfectly structured with the core purpose front-loaded in the first sentence, followed immediately by the filesystem analogy. The bullet points efficiently demonstrate the three-level navigation pattern without redundancy. Every sentence and example earns its place.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema (which handles return value documentation) and 100% schema parameter coverage, the description provides complete contextual coverage. The hierarchical browsing concept is fully explained, and the filesystem analogy provides sufficient mental model for an agent to use the tool effectively.

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?

While the input schema has 100% coverage with detailed examples, the description adds valuable semantic context beyond the schema by framing the path parameter as a filesystem-like navigation system. The 'ls /' and 'cat' metaphors help agents understand the parameter's purpose as a navigation pointer rather than just a string value.

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 'Browse[s] YADE Python API documentation hierarchically' with a specific verb and resource. The filesystem analogy ('like a filesystem') effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like yade_query_api (likely search/lookup) and yade_execute_code (execution), establishing its unique navigation/exploration purpose.

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 excellent implicit usage guidance through the progressive disclosure examples (empty path → categories → classes → details). However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to choose this over yade_query_api for API discovery, though the hierarchical 'browse' metaphor strongly implies use for exploration versus direct querying.

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