Create a learning track (curated course sequence). After this, add courses in order with hivelearn_add_track_course. is_published defaults to false — publish once the curriculum is set.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| title | Yes | ||
| description | No | ||
| is_featured | No | ||
| is_published | No | Defaults to false | |
| thumbnail_url | No | ||
| estimated_hours | No | ||
| difficulty_level | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the is_published default and advises deferring publication, but it does not mention the return value, required permissions, or any side effects beyond creation. This leaves some ambiguity about what the agent receives after calling the tool.
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?
Three short sentences with no filler. The first sentence states purpose, the second gives the next action, and the third explains the default behavior. Every sentence earns its place.
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?
The description covers the creation intent and the follow-up workflow, but because there is no output schema, it should explain what the tool returns—particularly since the track ID is presumably needed for hivelearn_add_track_course. It also leaves several parameters under-elaborated, making the overall guidance useful but incomplete.
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 only 14% (only is_published gets an inline description). The description repeats that default but leaves title, description, thumbnail_url, estimated_hours, and difficulty_level unexplained beyond their schema types and enum choices. The 'curated course sequence' phrase adds conceptual context but not per-parameter semantics.
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 opens with 'Create a learning track (curated course sequence)', clearly identifying the action and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools by tagging hivelearn_add_track_course as the next step and separating 'track' from raw course creation.
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?
It gives explicit workflow guidance: 'After this, add courses in order with hivelearn_add_track_course' and 'publish once the curriculum is set.' This directly instructs the agent on sequencing and when to set is_published, though it does not explicitly list when not to use the tool versus other create_* siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Every tool targets a distinct resource/action combination, and similar-looking tools are carefully differentiated in descriptions (e.g., get_course_structure vs list_course_modules, update_lesson vs update_lesson_content). There is no meaningful overlap or ambiguity between tools.
All tools use a consistent 'hivelearn_<verb>_<noun>' pattern with common verbs (get, list, create, update). The only minor deviation is 'add' vs 'create' (add_track_course vs create_track), but this is semantically appropriate and does not disrupt the overall pattern.
With 57 tools, the server is significantly over the recommended range and exceeds the 25+ threshold for 'too many'. While the broad domain (courses, community, analytics) justifies a large surface, this many tools makes selection overwhelming for agents and suggests a need for consolidation or sub-servers.
The tool surface covers create, read, and update for most core entities (courses, lessons, quizzes, tracks, posts, events, resources), plus publishing/verification and analytics. However, there are notable gaps: no delete operations for courses, lessons, modules, quizzes, posts, events, resources, or enrollments, and no way to remove a course from a track. These lifecycle holes are significant but not fatal for common workflows.
