EduBase MCP Server

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds no behavioral context beyond these annotations—specifically, it does not explain what 'check' means (existence verification vs retrieval), error handling when a class is not found, or what data structure the output schema represents.

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?

While extremely brief (three words), the description wastes the agent's attention by introducing ambiguity with 'Get/check' rather than being precise. The slash conflates two potentially different operations without clarification.

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?

Although an output schema exists (reducing the need for return value description), the description inadequately addresses the tool's core ambiguity—whether it performs retrieval, existence checking, or both. For a tool with a single parameter, the description should clearly resolve this behavioral question.

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 description coverage is 100% ('class identification string'), so the schema fully documents the single parameter. The description adds no additional semantic information about the parameter format or examples, warranting the baseline score for high schema coverage.

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 'Get/check class' restates the tool name with minimal expansion. The slash creates ambiguity between retrieval and verification semantics, and it fails to distinguish this single-class lookup from the sibling edubase_get_classes (plural list) or other class-related tools.

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?

No guidance provided on when to use this tool versus edubase_get_classes (list vs single record) or other class-related operations. No mention of prerequisites or error conditions for the 'check' functionality.

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