service_principals_patch

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

Description only says 'Apply partial modifications', which aligns with readOnlyHint=false. However, it does not disclose any other behavioral traits such as required permissions, rate limits, idempotency, or side effects beyond what is implied by the mutation.

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?

Single sentence, no fluff, but could benefit from slightly more structure or detail without becoming verbose.

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?

Output schema exists, reducing burden, but description does not mention return value (expected to be the updated service principal). It is adequate but could be more complete for a mutation tool.

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% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states 'Apply partial modifications to a SCIM service principal', distinguishing it from a full update (service_principals_update) and other operations like create/delete/get/list. However, it could more explicitly contrast with the update tool.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., service_principals_update). No prerequisites, conditions, or exclusions mentioned.

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