disable_user

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'mutation', which is a GraphQL type, not a behavioral explanation. It does not describe what disabling a user entails, whether it is reversible, or any side effects.

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 dense block listing variables and a long example. It lacks clear structure and includes redundant information already present in the schema. The front-loaded 'User · mutation disableUser' is minimal but the remainder is clutter rather than useful guidance.

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 tool with 14 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, this description is grossly inadequate. It fails to explain the core operation, the meaning of most parameters, or any behavioral implications. The example variables are truncated and cryptic, leaving the agent without enough context to invoke the tool correctly.

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 description lists all parameter names and provides an example object, but it does not explain the meaning of any parameter. The schema itself only provides GraphQL type names (e.g., 'ID!', 'String'), which are not semantically helpful. The example offers some structural hints but falls far short of clarifying the purpose of each parameter, especially the many filter/order pairs.

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 says 'mutation disableUser' which essentially restates the tool name. It gives no explicit statement of what the tool does, such as 'Disables a user account'. It is a tautology rather than a meaningful explanation.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like enable_user, delete_user, or update_user. The description does not mention any prerequisites, context, or exclusions.

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