provider_admin_mutate

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

Beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true), the description adds critical context: the tool is gated by a configuration flag, requires approval, and is audited. This fully discloses behavioral traits.

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 two sentences, front-loading the core purpose and adding essential gating information without redundancy.

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 mutating gated admin tool, the description covers purpose, usage conditions, behavioral context, and parameter semantics. No output schema exists, but the tool's return is not complex.

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 schema covers both parameters, but the description enriches operationId with concrete examples (e.g., 'mcp.remove', 'login/logout'). The provider enum is self-explanatory.

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 verb 'Execute' and the resource 'mutating provider CLI admin operation' with examples. It distinguishes from sibling tools like provider_admin_list by highlighting the mutating nature.

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 specifies the condition for use ('Disabled unless [admin] allow_mutating_cli_admin_ops=true') and mentions approval and auditing. However, it does not explicitly contrast with non-mutating alternatives like provider_admin_run.

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