create_trust_policy_mapping

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

No annotations are provided. The description indicates it is a WRITE operation requiring a specific token type, but does not disclose potential side effects, idempotency, rate limits, or error conditions. Minimal behavioral context.

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?

Two sentences, no unnecessary words. Purpose is stated first, followed by a prerequisite. Highly efficient and 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?

While the purpose and prerequisite are clear, the description does not specify return values (no output schema provided), idempotency, or error handling. For a creation tool with required parameters, this is adequate but not fully complete.

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 each parameter. The description adds value by detailing the structure of the 'mapping' object beyond the schema's generic 'additionalProperties', listing expected fields like serviceUserUuid, environmentId, etc.

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 action ('Create') and the resource ('WIF service user mapping for a trust policy'), includes context (IAM v1, WRITE), and implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like delete, list, get for the same resource.

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?

Mentions a prerequisite ('Requires an account-scoped platform token'), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_trust_policy or add_iam_user. The name and context make it clear, but explicit guidance is missing.

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