require_password_reset

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden: it declares [WRITE] and risk=medium, notes reversibility, clarifies that undo only affects flags set by this call, and mentions dry_run for preview. This covers key behavioral traits, though it doesn't detail authentication requirements or error handling.

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 leads with a compact action statement and a useful risk tag, followed by a tidy args list. Every sentence adds value, and the format is scannable and front-loaded with the critical information.

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 4-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the main action, the undo behavior, the dry_run safeguard, and the target parameter. It provides enough guidance to invoke correctly without requiring external lookups, and the no-output-schema case is adequately handled since return values aren't specified.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description explains every parameter: user_id is sourced from list_users, clear denotes the undo path, dry_run previews without changing, and target specifies the IdP from config with a default. This fully compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 states a specific action: 'Require a password reset at next sign-in' with a clear resource (password reset) and context (Keycloak required actions). It also differentiates the undo path, distinguishing it from sibling tools like disable_user or revoke_user_sessions.

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?

It provides clear usage context, including the undo mode ('Pass clear=True to remove a pending requirement instead') and the reversibility condition. While it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools, the action is well-scoped and the guidance on when to use clear=True versus the default adds practical direction.

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