Put user on hold

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

The description discloses the key behavioral trait: the user remains inactive until first connection, and only then does the on-hold timer start. This goes beyond the annotations, which only indicate non-read-only and non-destructive, by clarifying the actual state transition and timing semantics.

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 two sentences with no filler. The state change and behavior are front-loaded, and the use case is stated compactly in the second sentence.

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 output schema exists, return details are not required. The description covers what the tool does, when it is useful, and the key timing behavior. It might have also referenced the optional onHoldExpireDuration explicitly, but the overall context is sufficient for correct invocation.

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?

The schema documents onHoldExpireDuration in detail, and the description reinforces its meaning by explaining when the on-hold timer starts. However, the username parameter is not discussed in the description, and with only 50% schema coverage the description only partially compensates for the undocumented parameter.

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 uses a specific verb ('Sets a user's status to on_hold') and names the exact resource and state being changed. It also explains the distinctive lifecycle behavior — inactive until first connection, then the on-hold timer starts — which differentiates it from sibling tools like activate or deactivate.

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 gives clear usage context: 'Useful for provisioning an account ahead of time without starting its clock.' This tells the agent when this tool is appropriate, though it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or name sibling tools.

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