EduBase MCP Server

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

Annotations indicate non-destructive write permissions (readOnlyHint: false, destructiveHint: false). The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond these annotations by specifying the storage is 'temporary' and clarifying the prerequisite link-acquisition workflow, which helps the agent understand this is a multi-step process.

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, information-dense sentence that efficiently packs the action, source options, destination, and critical workflow prerequisite without redundancy. Every clause serves a distinct purpose in guiding the agent.

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 the simple 3-parameter schema and lack of output schema, the description adequately covers the essential workflow context (temporary storage nature and prerequisite link requirement). It could be improved by mentioning what happens upon success or how the uploaded file is referenced subsequently, but the core operational context is present.

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 parameter definitions in the schema are comprehensive. The description adds workflow context by implying the `filebin` parameter is the 'link requested from the API in advance' and the `source` parameter accepts 'local file or a file from a URL,' but does not add significant semantic detail beyond what the schema already 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?

Description clearly states the action (Upload), source types (local file or URL), and destination (EduBase temporary file storage). However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling `edubase_post_filebin_upload`, leaving potential ambiguity about which tool to use for initiating vs. completing the upload workflow.

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 implies a prerequisite workflow by stating the link must be 'requested from the API in advance,' which hints at execution order. However, it fails to explicitly name the prerequisite tool (likely `edubase_post_filebin_upload`) or clarify when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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