Guides you through signing in to Udemy and using its screens to create coupons or update courses before you begin an instructor task.
How to work in Udemy (create coupons and update courses): its screens and the sign-in link. Call this first.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| task | No | What you want done in Udemy, in your words. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations present, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does say what the tool surfaces (screens and sign-in link), which signals a read-only orientation/help resource, but it does not state the response shape (free text vs structured screen map) or any limits on the guide's 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?
One compact sentence plus a front-loaded imperative; nothing is wasted. Slightly awkward phrasing ('its screens and the sign-in link') but every clause carries information about content or ordering.
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 one-parameter, no-output-schema helper this is close to adequate: it says what the guide contains and that it should be called first. It falls short on whether the guide must precede every task or only at session start, and on what the agent receives back.
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?
There is a single 'task' parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already explains it as free-form user intent. The description's examples (create coupons, update courses) give useful framing for what to put in 'task' but add no syntax or constraint detail beyond the schema.
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 names the resource (Udemy) and what the guide covers concretely: 'its screens and the sign-in link', with example tasks (create coupons, update courses). That distinguishes it from the action siblings (udemy_open, udemy_click, udemy_type) which perform operations rather than explain them. The framing 'How to work in Udemy' is slightly soft but the parenthetical grounds it.
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?
'Call this first' is an explicit ordering directive that tells the agent when to reach for this tool relative to all six siblings. What's missing is a when-not condition or whether it needs to be re-called per task versus once per session.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.