EduBase MCP Server

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=false. The description aligns with 'Create new' implying a write operation, but fails to explain the critical non-idempotent behavior—whether calling twice creates duplicate permissions or errors. It also omits what the tool returns despite the existence of an 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 a single, efficient sentence with no filler. 'Create new' is slightly redundant but acceptable. Information is front-loaded and 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?

While the basic operation is stated, the description lacks completeness given the tool's complexity. It fails to address the non-idempotent behavior (idempotentHint=false), doesn't mention the output schema exists, and omits error conditions (e.g., invalid permission levels, non-existent users). Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 (all three parameters have clear descriptions including the enum values for permission), the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter context (e.g., format of identification strings, whether user is email or ID), so it meets but does not exceed the baseline.

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 clearly states the action (Create) and target (permission for a user on a SCORM learning material). It distinguishes from siblings like edubase_delete_scorm_permission and edubase_get_scorm_permission through the verb 'Create' and resource 'SCORM', though it could explicitly contrast with these alternatives.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like edubase_get_scorm_permission (to check existing permissions) or edubase_delete_scorm_permission (to remove). It also omits prerequisites such as whether the user or SCORM must exist first, or handling of duplicate permissions.

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