deactivate_user

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

The description states this tool sets active=false, which is a write operation, yet the annotation declares readOnlyHint=true. This is a direct contradiction. Based on the instructions, a score of 1 is mandatory when the description contradicts annotations. No other behavioral traits are disclosed.

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, front-loaded sentence containing only essential information: the action, the effect, and a key prerequisite. There is no redundant content; every word earns its place.

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 apparent mutation behavior and no output schema, the description should disclose more about what happens after deactivation (e.g., related record effects, reversibility). The contradiction with readOnlyHint makes the definition misleading and incomplete, as the agent cannot trust the stated behavior. Important operational details are missing.

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%, with the parameter 'user' already documented as 'User sys_id, user_name, or email'. The description adds nothing beyond that, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description does not clarify formats, validation rules, or any additional parameter behavior.

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 clearly states the verb 'Deactivate' with the resource 'user' and the exact mechanism 'by setting active=false'. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like create_offboarding_case and update_user, which serve different purposes. The purpose is 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 a clear conditional for usage ('Requires WRITE_ENABLED=true'), informing the agent when the tool is applicable. However, it does not explicitly mention alternative tools or cases where this tool should not be used. The prerequisite is useful but lacks explicit alternatives.

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