eduframe-mcp

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

No annotations are provided, placing full disclosure burden on the description. The description fails to specify mutation behavior (partial vs full updates, idempotency), error handling for invalid IDs, or side effects. Only the word 'Update' hints at mutability, providing minimal transparency.

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?

While brief (4 words), the description suffers from under-specification rather than efficient conciseness. The single sentence provides no actionable information beyond the tool name itself, failing the 'every sentence should earn its place' standard.

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 mutation tool with 4 parameters and no annotations or output schema, the description is grossly inadequate. It omits critical context such as which fields are updatable (implied only by schema), whether relationships (planned_course_id, teacher_role_id) can be changed independently, and success/failure behaviors.

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, the structured schema already documents all four parameters (id, planned_course_id, teacher_id, teacher_role_id) and their types. The description adds no additional parameter context, syntax guidance, or examples, meeting the baseline 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 'Update a teacher enrollment' restates the tool name (update_teacher_enrollment) without adding specificity. It identifies the action and resource but fails to distinguish from sibling tools like create_teacher_enrollment or delete_teacher_enrollment, or specify which attributes can be modified.

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 (e.g., create_teacher_enrollment_by_planned_course_id), nor any mention of prerequisites such as requiring an existing enrollment ID or whether reassigning teachers requires update versus create/delete workflows.

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