eduframe-mcp

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

Annotations already establish this is read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds 'all' to indicate bulk retrieval behavior, but fails to disclose that the operation is paginated (despite having cursor/per_page parameters) or what happens if the custom field doesn't exist.

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?

Extremely concise at 7 words. The single sentence efficiently communicates the core operation without redundancy or filler content. Every word serves a purpose, and the description is appropriately front-loaded.

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 presence of annotations covering safety properties and 100% schema coverage, the description is minimally adequate. However, for a 4-parameter tool with pagination support and no output schema, it should mention the pagination behavior and distinguish itself from the singular 'get_option' sibling.

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 adds no parameter-specific context, and the schema descriptions for required parameters 'object_type' and 'field_slug' are confusingly identical ('ID of the parent resource'), which the description does not clarify or disambiguate.

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 operation ('Get') and resource ('options of a custom field') but fails to differentiate from the sibling tool 'get_option_of_custom_field' (singular). While 'all' implies a list operation, it doesn't clarify when to use this paginated list endpoint versus retrieving a single specific option.

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 tool versus alternatives like 'get_option_of_custom_field' (singular) or mutating siblings ('add_option_to_custom_field', 'update_option_of_custom_field'). No mention of prerequisites or required context for the 'object_type' and 'field_slug' parameters.

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