Model Context Protocol (MCP) Tool Descriptions Are Smelly! Towards Improving AI Agent Efficiency with Augmented MCP Tool Descriptions
Abstract
Foundation model agents rely on natural language tool descriptions for effective interaction with external systems, but poor description quality significantly impacts performance and efficiency.
The Model Context Protocol (MCP) introduces a standard specification that defines how Foundation Model (FM)-based agents should interact with external systems by invoking tools. However, to understand a tool's purpose and features, FMs rely on natural-language tool descriptions, making these descriptions a critical component in guiding FMs to select the optimal tool for a given (sub)task and to pass the right arguments to the tool. While defects or smells in these descriptions can misguide FM-based agents, their prevalence and consequences in the MCP ecosystem remain unclear. Hence, we examine 856 tools spread across 103 MCP servers empirically, assess their description quality, and their impact on agent performance. We identify six components of tool descriptions from the literature, develop a scoring rubric utilizing these components, and then formalize tool description smells based on this rubric. By operationalizing this rubric through an FM-based scanner, we find that 97.1% of the analyzed tool descriptions contain at least one smell, with 56% failing to state their purpose clearly. While augmenting these descriptions for all components improves task success rates by a median of 5.85 percentage points and improves partial goal completion by 15.12%, it also increases the number of execution steps by 67.46% and regresses performance in 16.67% of cases. These results indicate that achieving performance gains is not straightforward; while execution cost can act as a trade-off, execution context can also impact. Furthermore, component ablations show that compact variants of different component combinations often preserve behavioral reliability while reducing unnecessary token overhead, enabling more efficient use of the FM context window and lower execution costs.
Community
The Model Context Protocol (MCP) is rapidly becoming the "USB-C for AI," but the natural-language descriptions powering it are riddled with traditional software "smells."
This is an automated message from the Librarian Bot. I found the following papers similar to this paper.
The following papers were recommended by the Semantic Scholar API
- From Docs to Descriptions: Smell-Aware Evaluation of MCP Server Descriptions (2026)
- Don't believe everything you read: Understanding and Measuring MCP Behavior under Misleading Tool Descriptions (2026)
- MCPAgentBench: A Real-world Task Benchmark for Evaluating LLM Agent MCP Tool Use (2025)
- Optimizing FaaS Platforms for MCP-enabled Agentic Workflows (2026)
- MCP-Atlas: A Large-Scale Benchmark for Tool-Use Competency with Real MCP Servers (2026)
- Enterprise Identity Integration for AI-Assisted Developer Services: Architecture, Implementation, and Case Study (2026)
- Breaking the Protocol: Security Analysis of the Model Context Protocol Specification and Prompt Injection Vulnerabilities in Tool-Integrated LLM Agents (2026)
Please give a thumbs up to this comment if you found it helpful!
If you want recommendations for any Paper on Hugging Face checkout this Space
You can directly ask Librarian Bot for paper recommendations by tagging it in a comment: @librarian-bot recommend
Models citing this paper 0
No model linking this paper
Datasets citing this paper 0
No dataset linking this paper
Spaces citing this paper 0
No Space linking this paper
Collections including this paper 0
No Collection including this paper