update_ldap_configuration

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only says 'update', which implies mutation but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as required permissions, side effects, or whether the update is additive or replaces the entire configuration. The description adds 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?

The description is extremely concise at six words, which is efficient and front-loaded. However, it may be too terse for a tool with complex parameters, missing opportunities to provide critical context without adding much length.

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 tool's complexity (nested object with multiple fields) and the absence of an output schema or annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the 'singleton' represents, how updates interact with existing configuration, or what the tool returns.

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 covers all parameters (100% coverage) with types and constraints, but the description adds no extra meaning. The inner properties lack descriptions in both the schema and the description. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate because the schema already documents the structure adequately.

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 (Update) and the resource (ldap-configuration singleton). It is specific but does not differentiate from sibling tools like update_saml_configuration or get_ldap_configuration.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no context on when it should or should not be invoked. The description only states the action without any usage direction.

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