EduBase MCP Server

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

While annotations indicate this is a non-destructive write operation (readOnlyHint: false, destructiveHint: false), the description adds no behavioral context beyond these hints. It fails to explain what 'transfer' entails (move vs. copy), side effects, or the nature of the output 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. While it wastes no space, it is arguably underspecified for a state-changing operation. However, the sentence is front-loaded and contains no redundant information.

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 well-documented input parameters, the description meets minimum requirements. However, for a mutation tool with non-idempotent hints, it lacks explanation of business logic, success/failure states, or what the operation returns.

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 ('Quiz identification string', 'user identification string'), the schema fully documents the parameters. The description adds no additional semantic context (e.g., ID formats, lookup requirements), meriting the baseline score.

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 states the basic action (Transfer) and target (Quiz to user), but 'Transfer' remains ambiguous without context—it could imply assignment, ownership change, or duplication. It does not differentiate from sibling tools like `edubase_post_quiz` (create) or `edubase_post_quiz_permission` (share access).

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 alternatives (e.g., assigning via permissions vs. transferring), prerequisites (whether the user must exist beforehand), or post-conditions. The agent must infer usage from the parameter names alone.

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