Update email

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden. It usefully discloses the credential requirement, but says nothing about side effects an agent would care about: whether changing email invalidates sessions or API keys, whether verification is triggered, or whether the change is immediate.

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?

Two short sentences with zero filler, and the auth prerequisite is front-loaded right after the action. The terseness borders on under-specification rather than waste, but nothing written is redundant.

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 six-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the action and the credential prerequisite but leaves side effects, failure modes, and the panel/key override params unexplained. Adequate to attempt a call, not complete.

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 coverage is 67%; the description touches only email and password, both of which the schema already marks as required. It adds no format, constraint, or meaning for the four undocumented connection-override params (panel, baseUrl, clientKey, applicationKey), though those are largely self-explanatory in schema.

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+resource ('Change the account email') that an agent can immediately distinguish from account_update_password and other account_* siblings. It does not explicitly name the nearest sibling, so it falls just short of 5.

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 prerequisite 'Requires the current password' is a real usage condition, but there is no guidance on when to choose this over account_update_password or what to do if the password isn't known. Usage is implied from the name rather than spelled out.

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