Disable user

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true), but the description adds the crucial behavioral fact that the user is blocked from logging in while data survives, which an agent would not infer from destructiveHint=false alone. It also exposes the underlying PUT endpoint, useful for replay/idempotency reasoning; it does not discuss permissions or error conditions.

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 semantic statement is front-loaded in the first sentence with zero wasted words. The appended raw endpoint line is somewhat redundant for an agent caller, but it is short and does not obscure the primary meaning.

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 single-parameter state-toggle with no output schema, the definition supplies what an agent needs: what state change occurs, that data persists, and that login is blocked. Missing only explicit alternative-selection guidance and any note on required admin privileges.

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?

There is only one parameter and schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the burden. It conveys that exactly one account is targeted and the URL template {user_id}/disable makes the identifier's role unambiguous, which is sufficient for a self-named user_id string.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('Disable one account') and immediately defines the consequence ('it can no longer log in; data is kept'), which lets an agent distinguish it from nextcloud_delete_user and nextcloud_enable_user by implication. It stops short of naming those siblings explicitly, so it is clear but not maximally differentiating.

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 phrase 'data is kept' hints at when to prefer disabling over deleting, and the login-blocking consequence implies a suspend/deactivate use case. However, there is no explicit statement of when to use this versus nextcloud_delete_user or nextcloud_enable_user, so the routing guidance is only implied.

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