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. While 'Remove' implies deletion, the description does not state whether this action is reversible, if notifications are sent to the teacher, or what happens if the teacher is required for the event. It omits critical safety context for a destructive operation.

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 description is a single, efficient sentence with no redundant words. It immediately states the action and target, making it appropriately front-loaded for quick comprehension.

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 single-parameter schema and lack of output schema, the description adequately covers the basic operation. However, for a destructive tool with no annotations, it is incomplete—it should mention irreversibility, potential side effects (e.g., triggering rescheduling), or the domain-specific constraint that this specifically removes teacher attendees.

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 ('ID of the planning attendee to delete'), the baseline score applies. The description implies the attendee is a teacher, adding slight semantic context, but does not elaborate on parameter format, valid ranges, or how to obtain the ID. It meets the baseline expectation without adding significant param-specific guidance.

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 uses a specific verb ('Remove') and identifies the resource ('teacher'/'planning event'), clarifying that this targets an attendee association rather than the event itself (distinguishing it from siblings like delete_planning_event). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from delete_meeting or clarify that the attendee must be a teacher.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like delete_planning_event (which removes the entire event) or cancel_planned_course. It also fails to specify prerequisites, such as needing the specific planning attendee ID rather than the teacher ID or event ID.

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