EduBase MCP Server

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

Annotations indicate it is a non-read-only, non-destructive write operation, but the description adds no behavioral context about side effects, idempotency (creates duplicate orgs if called twice), return values, or the implications of the domain parameter requiring special privileges.

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?

Extremely concise at three words with no wasted text. However, the brevity borders on under-specification; it is front-loaded but lacks the substantive content to be truly useful.

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?

For a creation operation with 6 parameters and an output schema, the description is insufficient. It omits relationships to entities (members, webhooks, permissions), success behavior, and the privileged nature of certain operations mentioned in parameter descriptions.

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 coverage is 100% with detailed descriptions for all 6 parameters (name, description, domain, website, email, phone). The description adds no additional parameter context, meeting the baseline 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?

States the basic action ('Create') and resource ('organization') but lacks scope or differentiating context from siblings like edubase_post_user_organizations or edubase_post_organization_members. Minimal viable description.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use versus alternatives (e.g., patch_organization for updates), prerequisites (e.g., admin rights), or the special privileges required for setting the domain field as 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.