eduframe-mcp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'Get' implies a read-only operation, the description does not specify error handling (e.g., 404 behavior), required permissions, or rate limiting. It fails to disclose whether the operation is safe or idempotent beyond the implicit verb choice.

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 consists of a single, efficient nine-word sentence that immediately states the operation and resource type. There is no redundant or wasted language, though the brevity comes at the cost of omitting helpful contextual details.

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 two-parameter retrieval tool without output schema or annotations, the description meets minimum viability by identifying the core operation and resource. However, it lacks critical contextual details regarding sibling differentiation and behavioral specifics (error states, permissions) that would be necessary for robust agent operation given the presence of similar tools.

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 features 100% description coverage for both parameters (`course_id` and `id`), with the schema itself documenting that one is the parent resource ID and the other the specific record ID. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, but the schema adequately covers requirements, keeping this at baseline.

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 the specific verb 'Get' and identifies the resource as a 'planned course record'. It clarifies scope by stating 'single course', implying a singular retrieval operation that distinguishes it from potential list operations like `get_planned_courses_by_course_id`. However, it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or clarify when to use this specific endpoint versus the list variant.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to select this tool over similar retrieval options such as `get_planned_courses_by_course_id`. It lacks prerequisites, error conditions, or contextual triggers for usage. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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