eduframe-mcp

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

Annotations indicate this is a non-idempotent write operation (readOnlyHint: false, idempotentHint: false), but the description adds no behavioral context about side effects, return values (e.g., the created lead ID), or whether partial creation is atomic. It does not contradict annotations, but provides no additional transparency.

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?

While brief, 'Create a lead' is inappropriately sized for an 18-parameter tool with nested objects (address_attributes, lead_products). It is front-loaded but underspecified—conciseness should not come at the cost of essential context for complex operations.

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?

Given the high parameter complexity (18 optional params, nested structures) and lack of output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain return values, required field combinations, or relationships between linked entities (account vs user vs administrator).

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 94% schema description coverage, the parameter definitions are already comprehensive. The description adds no parameter guidance, but given the high schema quality, it meets the baseline expectation without needing to compensate for schema gaps.

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 'Create a lead' is a tautology that restates the tool name. It fails to define what constitutes a 'lead' in this context (e.g., a sales prospect/CRM record) or differentiate from sibling tools like update_lead or get_lead.

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 update_lead, or prerequisites for creation. The schema reveals relationships (account_id, user_id, administrator_id) that suggest ownership requirements, but the description mentions none of these constraints.

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