tailscale_update_user_roleChange a user's role in your Tailscale tailnet, such as owner, admin, or member. Specify the user ID and new role to update permissions.
Update a user's role in the tailnet.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| role | Yes | The new role to assign | |
| userId | Yes | The user ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.13.3Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotations, such as permission requirements (e.g., needing owner/admin privileges) or the effect of changing a role.
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, efficient sentence with no wasted words and is front-loaded with the action and resource.
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?
Given the tool's moderate complexity (2 required parameters, one enum, no output schema) and the presence of annotations covering safety, the description is minimally adequate. It lacks guidance on usage context and behavioral nuances like permission requirements, which would be helpful for an agent.
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 description coverage is 100%, with role having an enum of 7 values and userId described. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score 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?
The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Update a user's role in the tailnet.' This clearly distinguishes it from related user-management siblings like tailscale_suspend_user, tailscale_approve_user, and tailscale_delete_user. However, it doesn't explicitly name or differentiate itself from those alternatives.
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 such as tailscale_approve_user or tailscale_suspend_user, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The agent is left to infer usage from the tool name and description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.