EduBase MCP Server

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description confirms the domain-specific action (removing user-course permissions) but does not add behavioral details like what happens if the permission doesn't exist or side effects on course access.

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 consists of a single, efficient sentence with zero redundancy. The action verb is front-loaded, and every word contributes to understanding the tool's function.

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 100% schema coverage, complete annotations (destructive, idempotent hints), and the presence of an output schema, the description provides the minimum necessary semantic glue. However, it does not compensate for any gaps or add richness regarding the deletion behavior.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema fully documents all three parameters (course, user, permission) including the enum values. The description provides semantic context mapping these to the sentence structure [Remove] a [permission] from a [course] for a [user], but adds no additional syntax rules or format details beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('Remove') and clearly identifies the resource ('user permission from a course'), distinguishing it from siblings targeting classes, events, or exams. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from related operations like adding permissions (edubase_post_course_permission) or specify scope constraints.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites (e.g., verifying the permission exists), or expected error conditions. It merely states the action without context for selection criteria.

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