edubase_get_integrations

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the description adds minimal behavioral context. However, the phrase 'owned and managed' specifies a scoping constraint beyond what annotations convey, adding some value. No contradictions with annotations.

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 concise sentence without wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a straightforward list operation, though it could be slightly more descriptive without losing conciseness.

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 existence of an output schema (not shown but noted) and rich annotations, the description is adequate for a simple list tool. However, it does not mention pagination, filtering behavior (e.g., search disables page parameter), or return format, which could be helpful for completeness.

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?

The input schema has 3 parameters, all with descriptions covering 100% of the schema, so the baseline is 3. The tool description does not add any parameter information beyond what the schema provides, so no extra value.

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 'List owned and managed integrations' uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('integrations'), and it clearly distinguishes from the sibling tool 'edubase_get_integration' (singular) which likely retrieves a single integration. The phrase 'owned and managed' adds scope specificity.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, such as 'edubase_get_integration' (for a specific integration) or other list tools. The naming convention (plural vs singular) implies a listing function, but no when/when-not criteria are stated.

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