eduframe-mcp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'Get' implies a read-only operation, the description does not confirm the read-only nature, describe the response format, mention caching behavior, or specify what happens when the role ID does not exist (404 vs empty).

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 brief (four words) and lacks verbosity, but this brevity reflects under-specification rather than efficient information density. While appropriately sized for a simple get-by-ID operation, it fails to front-load any meaningful context about the resource or return value.

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 absence of annotations and output schema, the description should compensate by explaining what constitutes a 'teacher role' or what fields are returned. It fails to do so. While the operation is simple (single ID parameter), the description remains inadequate for an agent to understand the domain concept or expected result.

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 has 100% description coverage (the 'id' parameter is documented as 'ID of the teacher role to retrieve'). Since the schema fully documents the parameter semantics, the baseline score of 3 applies. The description adds no additional context about the parameter format or constraints beyond what the schema 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 'Get a teacher role' is a tautology that essentially restates the tool name. While it contains a specific verb (Get) and identifies the resource, it fails to distinguish from the sibling tool 'get_teacher_roles' (plural) or clarify that this retrieves a single specific record by ID versus listing multiple.

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 use this tool versus alternatives. It does not indicate that this should be used when a specific teacher role ID is known, or contrast it with 'get_teacher_roles' for listing purposes, nor does it mention error handling for invalid IDs.

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