users_disable

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses the core effect ('block VPN access') but doesn't clarify whether the user record remains intact, whether it's reversible via users_enable, or whether active sessions are terminated. The parenthetical adds some value but leaves behavioral details undisclosed.

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?

A single sentence with a parenthetical clarification. Every word earns its place; the core action and effect are front-loaded.

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 simple single-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description is adequate but not complete. It doesn't state whether the operation is reversible, what happens to active connections, or any permission requirements. Given the simplicity, a 3 is fair.

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 100% and the only parameter (userId) is described as 'User numeric ID'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, but with full coverage and a single simple parameter, the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb ('Disable') and resource ('a Remnawave user') with a clear effect ('block VPN access'). It distinguishes from siblings like users_enable and users_delete, though it doesn't explicitly name them.

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 implies the tool is for blocking a user's VPN access, which is a clear context. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this over alternatives like users_delete or users_revoke_subscription, nor does it mention any prerequisites or side effects.

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