eduframe-mcp

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

Annotations declare readOnly/idempotent/destructive hints, so the description carries reduced burden. However, it adds zero behavioral context beyond these annotations—no mention of pagination behavior, default page sizes, or what data structure is returned. It does not contradict annotations.

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 effective conciseness. The single sentence fails to earn its place by providing meaningful operational context. No information is front-loaded because virtually no information is present.

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 tool with 4 parameters including pagination controls (cursor, per_page) and filters (user_id, account_id), the description is inadequate. It omits that results are paginated, that filters exist, and what an affiliation represents. Despite good annotations, the agent lacks sufficient context to use this tool effectively.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, establishing a baseline of 3. The description mentions 'all' which conflicts slightly with the filtering parameters (user_id, account_id) present in the schema, but the schema clearly documents these optional filters. The description adds no semantic value beyond the schema.

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 affiliations' restates the tool name with minimal addition. While it identifies the verb (Get) and resource (affiliations), it fails to distinguish from sibling tools like get_organization_affiliations or define what constitutes an affiliation in this domain. It borders on tautology.

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 alternatives (e.g., get_organization_affiliations) or prerequisites. The description does not mention the pagination pattern (cursor/per_page) or explain that results can be filtered by user_id/account_id despite claiming 'all' affiliations.

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