eduframe-mcp

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

While annotations correctly indicate this is a read-only, non-destructive operation, the description adds no behavioral context about pagination behavior, filtering logic (e.g., whether filters are AND/OR combined), or performance characteristics (e.g., 'all' implies potentially large result sets).

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 extremely concise at only three words. However, it wastes its brevity by not front-loading critical information such as pagination support or filtering capabilities that would help an agent select this tool correctly.

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 has 5 parameters including complex filtering (model_type enum with 8 values, id array) and pagination, and lacks an output schema, the description is insufficient. It should mention the ability to filter by entity type (model_type) and that results are paginated.

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 mentions no parameters, so it neither adds meaning beyond the schema nor contradicts it. It fails to explain the relationship between parameters (e.g., that cursor/per_page enable pagination through the 'all' results).

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 labels' essentially restates the tool name (tautology) and fails to distinguish this tool from its sibling 'get_label' (singular). It does not clarify what 'labels' refers to in this domain or how this listing operation differs from retrieving a single label.

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 'get_label', 'create_label', 'update_label', or 'delete_label'. There is no mention of pagination requirements (despite cursor/per_page parameters) or when to use the various filters (model_type, search, id).

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