token_bowl_chat_admin_update_user

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the admin authorization requirement, multi-field atomic-like updating, and three specific failure modes (NotFoundError, ValidationError, AuthenticationError). It does not state reversibility or whether omitted fields are left unchanged.

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?

Front-loaded with the [ADMIN ONLY] tag and the core action, followed by well-organized Args/Returns/Raises sections. Some lines restate the obvious (Returns dict, Raises validation), but the structure is efficient and every argument line earns its place.

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 an 8-parameter admin mutation tool with no annotations, the description covers scope, authorization, per-field semantics, and error behavior; an output schema exists, so the extra 'Returns' line is redundant but harmless. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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 compensate, and it documents all 8 parameters by name with meaning (including that 7 are optional). Several entries are terse ('bot: Set bot status') and don't clarify the toggle semantics, so it is not fully restorative.

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 and resource ('Update any user's profile fields') and the [ADMIN ONLY] tag plus 'any user account' distinguishes it from the sibling self-service tools (token_bowl_chat_update_my_username/webhook/logo). An agent can tell this is the privileged counterpart without opening either schema.

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?

Clearly identifies the use context ('modify profile settings for any user account', 'update individual fields or multiple fields at once') and the hard prerequisite ('Requires admin privileges'). It does not explicitly name the self-update alternatives as the non-admin path, so it stops short of 5.

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