Get the Organization's SAML SSO configuration

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds value by noting the specific error condition when SAML has never been enabled, which goes beyond annotation data and helps the agent handle that case correctly.

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 two concise sentences. The first sentence states purpose and key fields; the second clarifies the error behavior. No wasted words, and critical information is front-loaded.

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?

Without an output schema, the description partially compensates by listing return fields and explaining the error case. However, it does not specify the response structure or additional details like HTTP status codes, leaving minor gaps for a tool with no 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 input schema has zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds meaning by listing the output fields (status, entity IDs, ACS URL), which helps an agent understand what data to expect, exceeding the baseline for parameterless tools.

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 tool reads the Organization's SAML SSO configuration, lists specific fields (status, entity IDs, ACS URL), and distinguishes it from sibling tools like enable/update/disable SAML by being the read operation.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks guidance on exclusions or alternative tools, but the error behavior note ('Returns an error if SAML has never been enabled...') provides implicit context about expected state.

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