An MCP for the Enjin Platform, for interacting with the Enjin Blockchain.
Two tools with basic schemas and descriptions, but significant gaps in parameter documentation and output schema clarity. Both tools have descriptions (10-20 chars baseline met), but lack depth on WHEN to use them and what they return. Input schemas are present with type definitions, but parameter descriptions are minimal. No error handling guidance, no output schema documentation, and no indication of idempotency or side effects. Naming follows verb_noun convention (create_, get_) which is good, but descriptions do not explain prerequisites, return structure, or recovery paths.
Create a new NFT collection on the Enjin Platform
Get a collection from the Enjin Platform
Output schema not documented. LLMs cannot plan downstream calls or extract required fields. create_collection returns only 'Created collection with ID: {id}' as free text; get_collection returns JSON.stringify() of raw API response without field descriptions.
Parameter descriptions are trivial (1-5 words). 'Name of the collection', 'Description of the collection', 'ID of the collection' do not explain format, constraints, or examples. LLMs cannot infer valid input ranges or formats.
Tool descriptions lack WHEN to use and prerequisites. 'Create a new NFT collection' does not explain: Do I need an API key? What happens if the name already exists? What is the expected latency? Is this idempotent?
| Scored | Grade | Overall | Spec posture | Rubric |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-09-23 | F | 47 | 2026-07-28+ | v2 |
No error recovery guidance. Error handling returns raw error.message (e.g., 'Error creating collection: {error}') without actionable next steps. LLM cannot distinguish retryable vs. fatal errors or what to do next.
create_collection is a destructive write operation but description does not state this. LLMs need to know which calls have irreversible consequences. No dry-run or confirmation step offered.