eduframe-mcp

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

No annotations are provided, yet the description discloses no behavioral traits such as pagination behavior (despite cursor/per_page parameters), read-only nature, or return value structure. The agent must infer behavior solely from parameter names.

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?

Single sentence is brief, but constitutes under-specification rather than efficient conciseness. The sentence restates the tool name without adding actionable information, failing to earn its place effectively.

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 3-parameter tool with no annotations or output schema, the description is insufficient. It omits domain context (what constitutes an organization affiliation), pagination details, and does not reference the user_id filtering capability in prose.

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%, documenting cursor, per_page, and user_id adequately. The description adds no parameter-specific context, meeting the baseline expectation for well-documented schemas.

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 organization affiliation records' is tautological, restating the tool name without clarifying what 'organization affiliations' represent. It claims to get 'all' records despite supporting a user_id filter parameter, and fails to distinguish from sibling tool get_affiliations.

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_affiliations or create_organization_affiliation. No mention of prerequisites or typical workflows.

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