get_ldap_source

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

Consistent with readOnlyHint and destructiveHint annotations. Adds behavioral details about including last sync status/errors, which annotations do not cover.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with core action, then additional value. No extraneous words.

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 simple 1-parameter tool with output schema, description provides sufficient context (how to identify source and key return value). No gaps.

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 single parameter 'source' is clarified as id (integer) or exact name (string). Schema has 0% description coverage, so description fully compensates.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves an ldap_sync_source by id or exact name, and distinguishes it from list_ldap_sources. Specific verb and resource with added context of sync status.

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?

Explicitly mentions retrieval by id or exact name and provides use case ('is LDAP sync working?'). Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative comparison, but context is clear.

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