eduframe-mcp

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

No annotations are provided, yet the description fails to disclose any behavioral traits: whether deletion is permanent, if it cascades to related records (enrollments, grades), or required permissions. The description carries the full burden and provides no behavioral context.

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 (3 words), this represents under-specification rather than valuable conciseness. The single sentence fails to earn its place by providing actionable context about the operation's scope or consequences.

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?

Despite low complexity (1 parameter) and complete schema coverage, the description is inadequate. It omits what a 'program element' represents (e.g., a course within a program, a module) and fails to explain the deletion impact, which is critical for a destructive operation even with good parameter documentation.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no additional semantics about the 'id' parameter (e.g., where to obtain it, validation rules) beyond what the schema already provides.

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 'Delete a element' is largely tautological, restating the tool name without the 'program' context. It fails to distinguish this tool from sibling deletion tools (delete_program, delete_program_edition) or explain what constitutes a 'program element' in this domain.

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 alternatives like delete_program or delete_program_edition, nor any mention of prerequisites (e.g., whether the element must be unlinked from enrollments first).

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