create_user

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden and covers critical behavioral traits: the secret is redacted and NOT returned, the operation is reversible only by removal, existing access keys have their secrets replaced with no undo, and new users lack policies until attached. It also discloses risk level and write semantics. This is exceptionally transparent.

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 front-loaded with the essential purpose, uses a compact header and short paragraphs that each add concrete value (security, upsert semantics, prerequisites), and includes a clearly formatted Args list. It is information-dense 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?

Given the tool's complexity (4 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers purpose, parameter semantics, important security caveats, undo limitations, and the effect on new users. It is complete for safe and correct invocation, leaving no major gaps.

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 0%, so the description must explain all parameters. It provides character limits, allowed patterns, redaction notes, dry-run behavior, and target context for each of the four parameters, going well beyond the schema's bare titles.

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 opens with 'Create or reset an IAM user,' which clearly states the verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like remove_user, set_user_status, and attach_user_policy by emphasizing the upsert/reset behavior and the creation of a fresh credential.

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 provides clear context on when to use the tool (creating a new user or resetting an existing user's secret) and explains the upsert behavior, dry-run preview, and the fact that new users have no policies. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is sufficient for selection among siblings.

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