edubase_put_exam_journey_graph

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds concrete mutation semantics: replacing a draft, creating/enabling the journey when needed, and the separate publish follow-up. It does not add auth or rate-limit details, but that is a minor gap given annotation coverage.

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?

Three tightly written sentences front-load the core replace operation, then the publish step, then the construction/reference guidance. No sentence is wasted.

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?

With an output schema and safety annotations already present, the description supplies the workflow constraints an agent needs: draft replacement, auto-creation/enabling, publishing, and how to generate valid nodes/settings. It is complete enough for correct invocation.

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%, so the schema already documents exam, nodes, schema, and settings. The description adds useful context beyond the schema by naming the portable JSON format and directing the agent to the skill or reference tool for constructing nodes and settings.

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 a specific verb and resource: replacing the draft journey started by an exam with a portable JSON journey, including creating/enabling if needed. It distinguishes this write operation from the sibling publish step and from read-oriented journey tools.

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?

It explicitly routes the agent: use edubase_post_exam_journey_publish to publish, use the edubase-exam-journeys skill to build nodes/settings, or fall back to edubase_mcp_reference to read the format. This gives clear prerequisites and alternatives.

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