Edupage MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

login_auto

Logs into Edupage via portal with auto school detection. Supports login using environment variables or provided credentials.

Instructions

Log in to Edupage via the portal (auto-detect school). No parameters needed if EDUPAGE_USERNAME and EDUPAGE_PASSWORD are set.

Args: username: Your Edupage username / email (defaults to EDUPAGE_USERNAME env var) password: Your Edupage password (defaults to EDUPAGE_PASSWORD env var)

Returns: Success or error message

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "login_auto"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`password`	No
`username`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jun 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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. It mentions auto-detection and defaults to env vars, but lacks details on what happens on failure, session management, or side effects. This is adequate but not thorough.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is very concise with a clear structure: purpose, usage note, parameter list, and return type. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given an output schema exists, the description doesn't need to detail return values. It covers the login process, env var fallback, and auto-detection. It could mention potential errors or prerequisites, but overall it is complete for a simple authentication tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description explains that parameters default to environment variables and are optional. The 'Args' section clarifies the purpose of each parameter, adding value beyond the schema defaults.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'Log in to Edupage via the portal (auto-detect school)', specifying the verb, resource, and automatic school detection. It distinguishes from the sibling 'login' tool through the auto-detect behavior.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description advises that no parameters are needed if environment variables are set, giving clear context on when to omit parameters. However, it does not explicitly compare to the sibling 'login' tool or state when not to use this tool.

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