ecp_mongo_update_user_password

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'change' without revealing side effects (e.g., whether existing sessions are invalidated, password complexity requirements, or if the operation is irreversible). This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 redundancy, but it is under-specified. It is short enough to be efficient, yet it fails to convey essential information, so the brevity is not an asset.

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 2-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the database context, password requirements, or expected outcomes. An agent could guess from parameter names but lacks confirmation.

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%, and the description mentions no parameter details. The schema lists only names (db_username, password) with no descriptions. The description does not clarify what values are expected, format, or constraints, leaving the agent to infer from parameter names alone.

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: 'Change a MongoDB user's password.' It clearly identifies the verb (change), the resource (MongoDB user's password), and is distinct from sibling tools like create_user, delete_user, and assign_user_to_database. However, it lacks additional scoping details (e.g., which database or user context) that would make it more precise.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention conditions for password changes, prerequisites, or exclusions (e.g., 'use create_user for new users'). The agent must infer the use case solely from the action described.

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