Skip to main content
Glama

create_authentication

Creates an authentication record for a user by linking a login identifier, user ID, and authentication provider type such as Azure AD or OpenID Connect.

Instructions

Create an authentication.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
uidYesLogin identifier.
user_idYesIdentifier of the associated User.
authentication_provider_typeYesType of the associated AuthenticationProvider.

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that executes the create_authentication tool logic. It calls apiPost to POST /authentications with the body (uid, user_id, authentication_provider_type), logs the response, and formats the result using formatCreate.
    async (body) => {
      try {
        const record = await apiPost<EduframeRecord>("/authentications", body);
        void logResponse("create_authentication", body, record);
        return formatCreate(record, "authentication");
      } catch (error) {
        return formatError(error);
      }
    },
  • Input schema definition for create_authentication. Defines required fields: uid (string), user_id (number), and authentication_provider_type (enum: azure_active_directory, eduframe, openid_connect, surf_conext). Uses Zod for validation.
    {
      description: "Create an authentication.",
      annotations: { readOnlyHint: false, destructiveHint: false, idempotentHint: false },
      inputSchema: {
        uid: z.string().describe("Login identifier."),
        user_id: z.number().int().describe("Identifier of the associated User."),
        authentication_provider_type: authenticationAuthenticationProviderTypeEnum.describe(
          "Type of the associated AuthenticationProvider.",
        ),
      },
    },
  • Registration of create_authentication via server.registerTool() with the tool name, schema, description, annotations (non-readonly, non-destructive, non-idempotent), and handler.
    server.registerTool(
      "create_authentication",
      {
        description: "Create an authentication.",
        annotations: { readOnlyHint: false, destructiveHint: false, idempotentHint: false },
        inputSchema: {
          uid: z.string().describe("Login identifier."),
          user_id: z.number().int().describe("Identifier of the associated User."),
          authentication_provider_type: authenticationAuthenticationProviderTypeEnum.describe(
            "Type of the associated AuthenticationProvider.",
          ),
        },
      },
      async (body) => {
        try {
          const record = await apiPost<EduframeRecord>("/authentications", body);
          void logResponse("create_authentication", body, record);
          return formatCreate(record, "authentication");
        } catch (error) {
          return formatError(error);
        }
      },
    );
  • The authenticationAuthenticationProviderTypeEnum Zod enum used as the type for the authentication_provider_type input field.
    const authenticationAuthenticationProviderTypeEnum = z.enum([
      "azure_active_directory",
      "eduframe",
      "openid_connect",
      "surf_conext",
    ]);
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false but description does not disclose side effects, permission requirements, or behavior on duplicate uids. Minimal disclosure beyond the name 'Create'.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Extremely concise with one sentence, but omits necessary details. Not appropriately sized for a tool that creates an entity; brief at the cost of clarity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema and vague annotations, the description should explain what creating an authentication entails, but it does not. Incomplete for a write operation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for all three parameters. Description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description 'Create an authentication' is a verb+resource but vague. Authentication could mean multiple things; schema reveals it links a user to a provider, but purpose is not clarified beyond the name. Among siblings, it's not clearly differentiated.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_user or create_account. Does not specify prerequisites or use cases.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/martijnpieters/eduframe-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server