users_bulk_actions_bulk_extend_expiration_date

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it says nothing about permissions, reversibility, idempotency, or failure behavior for a mutation that alters user state. The confirm/preview behavior is only disclosed by the schema description of the `confirm` parameter, not by the tool description itself, so this text adds little beyond the endpoint string.

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 essential purpose sentence is short and front-loaded after the endpoint, but the raw 'POST /api/users/bulk/extend-expiration-date' line and 'Tags: Users Bulk Actions Controller' are framework boilerplate that do not help an agent select or invoke the 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 destructive bulk mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the description omits required context: whether results are previewed vs applied (only in schema), what happens on partial failure, ordering, or expected response shape. It is not sufficient on its own to call this tool safely.

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 50%: `confirm` is well documented in the schema, while `userIds` and `extendDays` rely on constraints (max 500, range 1-9999). The description adds only 'by days' to clarify the `extendDays` semantics and says nothing about the userIds array beyond 'specified users'.

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?

States a specific verb ('Extend') and resource ('expiration date') scoped to 'specified users by days', which distinguishes it from the single-user `users_extend_user_expiration_date` and the all-users `..._bulk_all_extend_expiration_date` sibling. The HTTP method/path and 'Tags' line add boilerplate but the core purpose is unambiguous.

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?

Implicit usage is present through 'specified users', suggesting this is the bulk variant for an explicit list rather than all users. However, it never names the single-user or bulk-all alternatives or states the conditions (e.g. list size, prerequisites) that select this tool over them, leaving disambiguation to inference.

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