update_users

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. While it implies a mutating operation and suggests partial updates via 'fields to update', it does not disclose return values, error handling, or permission requirements, leaving significant behavioral gaps for a write operation.

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, direct sentence that delivers the core action and data format with no redundant content. It is front-loaded and appropriately sized.

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?

The tool is simple with two parameters and an output schema, so the description covers the basic use case. However, the absence of annotations and behavioral details (e.g., not-found handling, update semantics) leaves some context gaps that would help in edge cases.

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 provides no parameter descriptions, but the description clarifies that 'data' is a JSON string of fields to update and implies that 'row_id' is the record identifier via 'by id.' However, it lacks examples or allowed field details, so it only partially compensates for the 0% schema coverage.

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 ('Update'), names the resource ('users'), and specifies the identifier ('by id'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_users, get_users, and delete_users. It also states the data format, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool: updating an existing user row by its id. It does not explicitly mention exclusions or alternatives, but the context is specific enough for basic CRUD operations.

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