ISO country CF

Agent readability score

Strengths

• Some tools (e.g., 'validate-json', 'normalize-url') have clear, specific purposes.
• Parameters are consistently defined across all tools, reducing confusion.

Weaknesses

• Tool names like 'cc-cf' and 'agent-tool-index' are vague or overly technical, making intent unclear.
• Descriptions often fail to explain *when* to use a tool, only what it does (e.g., 'cc-cf' repeats the server's description).
• Massive parameter overlap (e.g., 'zone', 'url', 'json') across 30 tools creates ambiguity for the agent.
• No error handling or constraints are documented for any tool.
• Redundant tools (e.g., 'browser-url-ok' vs. 'playwright-url-ok') create confusion.

• cc-cf — Name and description are identical to the server, providing no actionable context.
• utc-time — Description lacks context for when this tool is useful (e.g., time zone conversions?).
• web-fetch — Overlaps with 'fetch-status' and 'inspect-robots' without clear differentiation.
• agent-tool-index — Name is too long and technical; description is overly complex for an agent to parse.

Verdict

The toolset suffers from poor naming conventions, vague descriptions, and excessive overlap between functions. While some tools are well-defined, the lack of clear use cases and parameter specificity will hinder an agent's ability to select and apply tools effectively, justifying the low readability score.

9/13/2026, 1:45:47 AM

Event narrative