create-identity-provider

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but only says 'create' with no detail on side effects, prerequisites, default values, error handling, or idempotency. It does not mention whether a realm must exist or what happens on duplicate aliases, leaving significant behavioral ambiguity.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word adds context, making it appropriately concise and well-structured.

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 11 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, this one-sentence description is inadequate. It omits return format, required preconditions, and usage scenarios, leaving the agent without enough context to use the tool correctly in a complex operation.

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 has 100% description coverage for all 11 parameters, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds general SSO context but does not enrich parameter meanings beyond what is already in the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 resource (identity provider) with an SSO integration scope. However, it does not distinguish from the sibling tool import-identity-provider-from-url, which also creates an identity provider but via URL import.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like import-identity-provider-from-url or when to prefer updating an existing provider. There are no mentions of prerequisites, exclusions, or contextual triggers, leaving the agent without selection support.

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