EduBase MCP Server

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

Annotations comprehensively cover safety (readOnly, destructive, idempotent hints), so the description's burden is lower. It adds valuable scope context ('owned and managed') beyond annotations, but does not disclose pagination behavior, rate limits, or the search vs. browse interaction detailed in the schema.

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 extremely concise at four words with zero redundancy. Every word serves a purpose. However, it borders on under-specification given the tool's behavioral complexity (dual query modes), warranting a 4 rather than 5.

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 presence of an output schema and comprehensive annotations, the description does not need to exhaustively detail return values. However, it omits guidance on the important interaction between 'search' and 'page' parameters ('not used in search mode!'), which is essential for correct invocation.

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 baseline is 3. The description does not add semantic context beyond the schema (e.g., explaining the search mode vs. pagination behavior or providing example search strings), but it doesn't need to compensate for schema gaps.

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 ('List') with clear resource ('integrations') and scope ('owned and managed'), distinguishing it from the singular 'get_integration' sibling. However, it lacks detail on what constitutes an 'integration' in this Edubase context.

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 implicitly distinguishes this list operation from singular fetch operations via the plural form and 'owned and managed' qualifier. However, it fails to mention critical usage patterns like the mutual exclusivity of 'search' and 'page' parameters noted in the schema.

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