eduframe-mcp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It fails to explain what 'cancel' means (status change vs. hard deletion), whether the operation is reversible, or if there are side effects like notifications or refund triggers.

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 four-word description contains no waste, but it suffers from under-specification rather than efficient conciseness. Given the complexity implied by the sibling tool cancel_enrollment, a single sentence restating the name is insufficiently informative.

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 destructive/mutative operation on a program enrollment, the description is inadequate. It lacks explanation of the cancellation logic, status implications, and differentiation from similar tools, leaving critical gaps despite the simple single-parameter schema.

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, the schema fully documents the 'id' parameter as 'ID of the program enrollment'. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, meeting the baseline expectation when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Cancel a program enrollment' is a direct tautology of the tool name cancel_program_enrollment, merely replacing underscores with spaces. While the verb and resource are clear, it fails to distinguish from the sibling tool cancel_enrollment, leaving ambiguity about which cancellation tool to use.

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 cancel_enrollment or other state-changing operations. No prerequisites are mentioned (e.g., whether the enrollment must be in a specific status to be cancellable).

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