jackrabbit_get_enrollmentOne enrollment by id (set future=true for a future-dated enrollment). GET /v1/Enrollments/{id} or /v1/Enrollments/future/{id}.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| future | No | true = look up a future-dated enrollment. | |
| enrollment_id | Yes | Jackrabbit enrollment id. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description's GET endpoint wording is consistent with that. It adds the future-enrollment routing detail, but does not describe error behavior, permissions, or what happens when the enrollment is not found.
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 a single compact line with no wasted text. The core lookup and the future flag condition are front-loaded.
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 simple read tool with full schema coverage and read-only annotations, the definition is sufficient to invoke it correctly. It could mention not-found behavior or expected return shape, but those are minor gaps for a basic by-id lookup.
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 coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already well documented. The description reinforces the future=true meaning but adds no syntax or constraints beyond what the schema provides.
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 a specific verb and resource: get one enrollment by id, with a distinct future-dated variant. It clearly separates this from list-oriented siblings such as jackrabbit_list_enrollments.
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?
It clearly indicates this is the by-id lookup and explains when to set future=true. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use this tool, but the usage context is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.