freeipa_user_add

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'create', failing to mention side effects (e.g., whether existing UID causes error), required privileges, or idempotency. The description is too terse.

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 with no redundant information. It is appropriately front-loaded but lacks structural elements like bullet points or sections, though this is acceptable for a simple 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?

Given the tool has 5 parameters and no output schema, the description should provide context about return values, error scenarios, or typical usage. It provides none, leaving the agent uninformed about outputs or failure modes.

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 itself adds no extra meaning beyond the tool's purpose, meeting the baseline 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 'Create a new user in FreeIPA' uses a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('user'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like freeipa_user_find (search) or freeipa_user_show (detail view). No ambiguity.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites, or exclusions. For example, it does not mention that freeipa_user_add is for new users versus freeipa_user_find for existing ones.

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