eduframe-mcp

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

While annotations correctly indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, the description adds no additional behavioral context such as error handling when the ID is not found, the structure of the returned record, or whether related entities are included.

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 four words, with no redundant or wasted language. However, it may be overly terse given the lack of output schema and behavioral details, suggesting insufficient information density rather than optimal conciseness.

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 low complexity (single required parameter) and presence of safety annotations, the description is minimally adequate. However, the absence of an output schema creates a gap that the description fails to fill regarding return value structure or content.

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 for the single 'id' parameter, the description meets the baseline expectation. However, it adds no supplementary context about the parameter's semantics, format requirements, or how to obtain valid IDs 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 states the basic action ('Get') and resource ('material group record'), but lacks specificity regarding scope (single record retrieval by ID) and fails to differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_material_groups' (plural) or explain what constitutes a material group.

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 such as 'get_material_groups' for listing multiple records. There are no prerequisites mentioned, though the required 'id' parameter implies the user must know the specific identifier beforehand.

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