Get Identity Provider

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

Annotations already provide strong behavioral cues (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true). The description adds only that it retrieves by ID, which is consistent but adds no extra behavioral context (e.g., what happens if ID not found).

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences that front-load the purpose and list the parameter. No redundant phrases.

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?

Given the extensive sibling list, the description is minimal. It omits any mention of return value or error handling. While the schema is rich, the tool would benefit from stating that it returns a single identity provider object.

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 schema covers 100% of parameters with a description identical to the description's mention. The description does not add any new meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score applies.

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 clearly states 'Get a specific identity provider by ID', which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling list tools (e.g., machship_get_identity_providers_for_company) by focusing on a single provider retrieval, though it could explicitly differentiate.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many similar identity-related tools (e.g., machship_get_identity, machship_get_identity_providers_for_company), the description should hint at appropriate contexts but does not.

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