eduframe-mcp

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

The description aligns with annotations (readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true) by using the verb 'Get', but adds no additional behavioral context such as error handling when the ID is not found, return format, or caching behavior. With annotations covering the safety profile, the description meets the minimum threshold.

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 four-word description is maximally concise with no filler, though it borders on underspecification. Every word earns its place, but the extreme brevity sacrifices helpful context.

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 single-parameter retrieval tool with complete annotations and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks guidance on the relationship to sibling tools and does not describe the expected return structure or error states.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for its single 'id' parameter. The description does not add semantic details about the parameter (e.g., examples, format), so it earns the baseline score for high schema coverage.

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 clear verb ('Get') and resource ('catalog variant record'), making the basic purpose understandable. However, it fails to distinguish from the sibling tool 'get_catalog_variants' (plural), which could help the agent select the correct tool for single-record vs. list retrieval.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_catalog_variants', 'get_catalog_product', or 'update_catalog_variant'. The agent must infer from the parameter schema alone that this retrieves a single record by ID.

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