Get all schools for any country code, including each school's name, address, town, postcode, state, phone, and LEA.
List all schools for a given country code (e.g. 'us', 'uk'). Each entry has name/address/town/postcode/state/phone/lea.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| country | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It clearly conveys a read-only listing operation and describes entry fields, but it does not address invalid country codes, case sensitivity, or pagination behavior. Adequate for a simple list, but not rich.
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 with no filler. The action and required input are front-loaded, and the output entry shape is summarized in a compact, useful way.
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 single-parameter tool with an output schema, the description is nearly complete: it specifies what the tool does, what input is expected, and what each output entry contains. Missing behavior for invalid or unknown country codes is a minor gap given the tool's simplicity.
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?
The schema only provides a bare 'country' string with 0% coverage, so the description must add meaning. It does so by clarifying the value should be a country code ('us', 'uk') rather than a full country name. It could specify allowed formats more precisely, but the guidance is meaningful.
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?
States a specific action ('List all schools') and resource (schools) with a clear input condition (country code) and example values. It is obviously distinct from siblings list_countries_tool and generate_documents.
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 implies when to use the tool: provide a country code to get schools. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives, such as using list_countries_tool to discover valid codes, or state when this tool should not be used.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.