get-identity-provider-mapper

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. 'Get' implies a read-only operation with no side effects, which is minimal behavioral disclosure. It does not mention error handling, permissions, or return format.

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, concise sentence ('Get details of a specific identity provider mapper') that conveys the essential purpose without waste. It is appropriately sized for a simple getter tool.

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 simple getter with fully documented schema parameters, the description is sufficient. It doesn't explain what 'details' includes, but no output schema exists and the tool is straightforward. Slightly more context about the returned data would improve completeness, but it's not critical.

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%, with each parameter (realm, alias, mapperId) having a clear description. The tool description adds no parameter-specific information, so it relies on the schema, earning the baseline score of 3.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' and resource 'details of a specific identity provider mapper', clearly distinguishing from sibling list/create/update/delete mapper tools. The word 'specific' differentiates it from list-identity-provider-mappers.

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 explicit usage guidance or alternatives are given. Usage is implied by the name and description: use when you need details of one specific mapper. It does not mention when not to use it or point to list/get alternatives.

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