add_ipmi_user

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one useful behavioral fact, that the created user is 'temporary', but says nothing about credential lifetime, permissions granted, or the need to clean up with remove_ipmi_user.

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?

A single compact sentence that front-loads the action and resource before the trailing parenthetical. The '(eq/add_ipmi_user)' endpoint note is minor internal noise but the structure is otherwise tight and efficient.

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?

Adequate for a 2-parameter mutation whose annotations carry the safety profile, but it omits the lifecycle context an agent would want: how the temporary credential is returned or used, and that remove_ipmi_user is the corresponding cleanup. Nothing misleading, just 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?

Both parameters are fully documented in the schema (id = Server ID, confirm = must be true), giving 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning such as credential naming or implications of the confirm flag.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create a temporary IPMI user') and clarifies its purpose ('for web access to IPMI'). It does not, however, differentiate itself from sibling tools like request_rh_kvm or remove_ipmi_user, so an agent must infer the distinction.

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 phrase 'for web access to IPMI' implies when the tool is relevant, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of alternatives such as request_rh_kvm or the paired remove_ipmi_user cleanup path. Usage is left to inference.

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