Enable SCIM provisioning for the Organization

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

Discloses critical behavioral details beyond annotations: requires confirm parameter, has no request fields, enabling alone grants no provisioning access (must create token separately). Annotations correctly reflect destructiveHint=false and readOnlyHint=false, and the description adds rich context without contradiction.

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?

Three sentences with clear front-loading of the main purpose, a critical requirement (confirm=true), and a behavioral caveat (no request fields, needs separate token). One sentence is slightly verbose ('live-probed 2026-08-18: this endpoint takes no request fields') but still relevant. Concise enough with very little waste.

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 only one parameter, no output schema, and good annotations, the description is fully complete. It explains what SCIM provisioning means, the single behavioral requirement (confirm), and the necessary post-step (create token). No important gaps remain for an agent to correctly invoke this 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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the confirm parameter's purpose ('requires confirm=true') and the broader context that enabling alone doesn't grant access. However, it doesn't describe other parameters beyond what the schema already documents, but with only one parameter and high coverage, the added context is meaningful.

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 the tool enables SCIM provisioning for an Organization, explaining SCIM's purpose (external IdP managing users). It stands apart from siblings like scaleway_iam_disable_scim, scaleway_iam_create_scim_token, and scaleway_iam_get_scim_config by explicitly stating it enables SCIM and listing related tools.

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 explicit when-not and prerequisite guidance: requires confirm=true, states enabling alone doesn't grant provisioning access, and directly names a sibling tool (scaleway_iam_create_scim_token) to use for token creation and IdP configuration. Also includes a future-dated note about no request fields, which helps an agent understand the expected behavior.

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