SailPoint MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states it's a list operation. It doesn't disclose behavioral traits like pagination handling (implied by offset/limit parameters), rate limits, authentication requirements, or what constitutes a valid role ID, leaving significant gaps for safe invocation.

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, clear sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose, making it efficient and easy to parse, which is ideal for concise tool definitions.

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?

For a tool with 3 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain return values, error conditions, or behavioral nuances like pagination, leaving the agent under-informed about how to use the tool effectively.

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 description coverage is 100%, so parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying role-based filtering, which aligns with the schema. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage without extra value.

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 ('List') and resource ('identities assigned to a specific role'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'list_identities' or 'get_identity', but the specificity about role-assigned identities provides adequate distinction.

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 like 'list_identities' or 'get_identity'. It lacks context about prerequisites, such as needing a valid role ID, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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