EduBase MCP Server

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: the trigger_event constraint explains a prerequisite configuration state. It could improve by mentioning idempotency implications (annotations show idempotentHint=false) or the fact that this makes an external HTTP call.

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?

Two sentences total with zero waste. The first sentence front-loads the core action and resource; the second sentence provides the critical constraint. Every word earns its place.

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 tool's moderate complexity (3 parameters) and lack of output schema, the description is adequately complete. It covers the prerequisite webhook configuration (trigger_event) which is essential for successful invocation. Missing minor details like timeout behavior or retry logic, but these are not required given the annotations provide safety context.

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 mentions 'optional custom payload' which aligns with the 'data' parameter semantics, but this largely paraphrases the schema's 'custom payload data to be sent' without adding syntax examples or format constraints beyond the schema's 'valid JSON string' requirement.

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 uses specific verb 'Trigger' with clear resource 'organizational webhook call' and clarifies the optional 'custom payload' capability. It effectively distinguishes this tool from sibling 'edubase_post_organization_webhook' (which likely creates webhooks) by focusing on execution rather than creation.

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 explicit constraint that it 'Only triggers webhooks with trigger_event set to api', which defines when the tool will succeed. However, it does not name an alternative tool or method for triggering event-based webhooks, leaving a small gap in guidance.

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