Suspend reseller user

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, yet the description adds real value beyond them: the specific failure mode for non-reseller accounts (403), the deployment-level MXROUTE_USERNAME restriction, and an explicit instruction to confirm with the user before calling.

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?

Three tight sentences: effect first, eligibility constraints second, safety warning last. Every sentence earns its place and nothing is repeated from the schema or annotations.

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 mutation with no output schema, the description covers effect, reversibility, eligibility, error behavior and the required confirmation step. An agent has everything needed to decide whether and how to call it.

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?

Only one parameter and schema description coverage is 100%, with the schema already giving the format and an example ('johndoe'). The description adds nothing about the parameter itself, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 ('Suspends a user account') and immediately scopes the target ('Reseller accounts only'), which distinguishes it from the sibling delete_reseller_user (permanent) and unsuspend_reseller_user (inverse). 'Interrupts their service until unsuspended' makes the reversible, temporary nature explicit.

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?

Gives clear when-not conditions: regular accounts are refused (typically 403) and the tool is unavailable when MXROUTE_USERNAME is in `reseller|user` form. It does not explicitly name unsuspend_reseller_user or delete_reseller_user as alternatives, so it falls just short of the top band.

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