Unraid API oidcConfiguration

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful context by explicitly stating that client secrets are excluded, which is a valuable safety guarantee beyond what the annotations convey.

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?

The description is a single, tightly written sentence that front-loads the core purpose and includes an important safety qualifier. There is no redundant information or unnecessary elaboration.

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 parameterless read-only tool with strong annotations, the description sufficiently states what will be returned: OIDC configuration and redirect origins. It also addresses the key security concern by noting the absence of client secrets, making the tool fully understandable without an output schema.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to clarify about parameter meanings. The description instead clarifies the scope of the returned data, which is appropriate for a parameterless endpoint.

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 the verb 'Get' and the specific resource: safe OIDC configuration and redirect origins. It also includes a distinguishing qualifier, 'without client secrets,' which separates this from other OIDC-related siblings that might return more sensitive or provider-level details.

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 implies the tool is for retrieving non-sensitive OIDC configuration data, but it does not explicitly state when to choose this over related siblings like query_oidc_providers or query_oidc_provider. No exclusions or alternative routing guidance is provided.

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