create_user

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose real behavior: it sets the UPN, sets an initial password, and enables the account in one shot. However, it omits what happens on duplicate sAMAccountName, whether the password must satisfy domain policy, permission requirements, and whether the operation is reversible.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then supporting detail, then a compact example. The second sentence partially restates the first ('Creates a user with specified attributes'), which is minor redundancy but nothing is bloated.

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 7-parameter nested mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the happy path adequately but leaves the agent without failure-mode, permission, or return-value guidance (e.g., does it return the created DN?).

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 coverage is 100%, so every parameter is already documented in the schema; baseline 3 applies. The example call and the 'custom OU placement' / 'additional attributes' sentences add modest framing (which params combine in a typical call) but no new semantics such as password constraints or OU default behavior.

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 first sentence names a specific verb and resource: 'Create a new user account in Active Directory.' That is instantly distinguishable from the sibling mutators modify_user, delete_user, enable_user, and disable_user.

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?

The description tells you what gets created and where, but never states when to prefer this tool over create_computer or create_group, nor when to follow up with modify_user. No prerequisites (admin rights, existing OU) are mentioned, so usage is only implied.

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