Skip to main content
Glama
CSOAI-ORG

Education AI MCP

by CSOAI-ORG
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
Python
Remote

generate_rubric

Create detailed assessment rubrics with custom criteria and performance levels for essays, presentations, projects, and more.

Instructions

Generate an assessment rubric with detailed criteria and descriptors.

Args:
    assignment_title: Title of the assignment
    criteria: Custom assessment criteria (auto-generated if omitted)
    levels: Number of performance levels (3-5)
    max_score: Maximum total score
    assignment_type: Type: essay, presentation, project, lab_report, portfolio

Behavior:
    This tool generates structured output without modifying external systems.
    Output is deterministic for identical inputs. No side effects.
    Free tier: 10/day rate limit. Pro tier: unlimited.
    No authentication required for basic usage.

When to use:
    Use this tool when you need structured analysis or classification
    of inputs against established frameworks or standards.

When NOT to use:
    Not suitable for real-time production decision-making without
    human review of results.
Behavioral Transparency:
    - Side Effects: This tool is read-only and produces no side effects. It does not modify
      any external state, databases, or files. All output is computed in-memory and returned
      directly to the caller.
    - Authentication: No authentication required for basic usage. Pro/Enterprise tiers
      require a valid MEOK API key passed via the MEOK_API_KEY environment variable.
    - Rate Limits: Free tier: 10 calls/day. Pro tier: unlimited. Rate limit headers are
      included in responses (X-RateLimit-Remaining, X-RateLimit-Reset).
    - Error Handling: Returns structured error objects with 'error' key on failure.
      Never raises unhandled exceptions. Invalid inputs return descriptive validation errors.
    - Idempotency: Fully idempotent — calling with the same inputs always produces the
      same output. Safe to retry on timeout or transient failure.
    - Data Privacy: No input data is stored, logged, or transmitted to external services.
      All processing happens locally within the MCP server process.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
assignment_titleYes
criteriaNo
levelsNo
max_scoreNo
assignment_typeNoessay
api_keyNo

Tool Definition Quality

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It extensively covers side effects (read-only, no state modification), authentication, rate limits, error handling, idempotency, and data privacy, leaving no ambiguity about safety or constraints.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-organized with clear sections (Args, Behavior, When to use/not, Behavioral Transparency). However, it is somewhat verbose, with redundant statements (e.g., 'Behavior' and 'Behavioral Transparency' both mention no side effects). Still, it remains readable and front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema and 0% schema coverage, the description covers most aspects thoroughly—purpose, usage, behavior, and constraints. However, it omits the output structure (e.g., format of the rubric) and fails to describe the api_key parameter. Overall, quite complete but with minor gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description lists parameters with brief explanations (e.g., 'criteria: Custom assessment criteria (auto-generated if omitted)'). However, the 'api_key' parameter in the schema is not mentioned in the description, and details like enum values for 'assignment_type' are only hinted via examples. Thus, partial compensation.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description begins with 'Generate an assessment rubric with detailed criteria and descriptors,' which clearly states the tool's specific verb+resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'analyze_student_progress' and 'create_quiz' by focusing on rubric generation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description includes dedicated 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' sections, providing explicit guidance on appropriate contexts (structured analysis/classification) and exclusions (not for real-time production decision-making without human review). It also mentions rate limits for free vs pro tiers.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/CSOAI-ORG/education-ai-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server