unlink_organization_identity_provider

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond the basic action. It does not mention consequences, permissions required, or any safety considerations, which the agent would need to know to avoid errors.

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, direct sentence with no wasted words. It is concise, though perhaps overly brief for the lack of other context. Structure is front-loaded and clear.

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 the lack of output schema and annotations, and the three required parameters, the description is too minimal. It does not explain the effect of unlinking, whether it is reversible, or any impact on authentication. More context is needed for safe and correct invocation.

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 minimal descriptions for each parameter (e.g., 'Realm name', 'Organization ID', 'Identity provider alias'). The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond these. No value is added, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Unlink an identity provider from an organization' uses a specific verb (unlink) and clearly identifies the resource (identity provider) and target (organization). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'link_organization_identity_provider' and 'get_organization_identity_provider'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, side effects, or conditions for unlinking. The agent is left without context to determine appropriate usage.

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