eduframe-mcp

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

While annotations declare readOnly/idempotent/destructive hints, the description fails to disclose critical behavioral traits: that results are paginated (cursor/per_page parameters exist), how the search filter behaves (fuzzy vs. exact), or whether filters combine with AND/OR logic. It mentions 'all' but the parameters clearly enable filtering.

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 efficient conciseness. The single sentence fails to earn its place by providing only tautological information that adds no value beyond the tool name itself.

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 tool's complexity (6 optional parameters supporting pagination and multi-field filtering), the description is inadequate. It omits pagination behavior, filter combinators, and the relationship to singular 'get_account', leaving significant gaps despite the rich input 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 across all 6 parameters (cursor, per_page, search, filters), the schema carries the semantic burden adequately. The description adds no parameter-specific context, but baseline 3 is appropriate since no compensation is needed for undocumented parameters.

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 'Get all accounts' is a tautology that restates the tool name (get_accounts). It fails to specify the domain of 'accounts' (business vs. personal) or distinguish from the sibling tool 'get_account' (singular), which likely retrieves a specific account by ID rather than listing multiple.

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 versus 'get_account' for single-record retrieval, or when to apply filters versus fetching unfiltered results. The existence of 6 optional filtering parameters suggests complex usage patterns that are not addressed.

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