n8n_change_user_role

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'Change' implies mutation, the description fails to specify side effects (e.g., immediate permission changes, session invalidation), authorization requirements, or whether the operation is reversible.

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 extremely concise with only one functional sentence. The '[UNIFIED]' prefix appears to be metadata noise rather than descriptive content, but the core message is front-loaded and efficient.

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 0% schema coverage, lack of output schema, and absence of annotations, the description is insufficient for safe invocation. It omits critical context such as valid role enumerations, the meaning of 'global' in this system, and error conditions.

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 0%, and the description completely fails to compensate. It does not explain what 'site' refers to (instance URL vs ID), the format of 'user_id', or valid values for 'new_role' (e.g., 'owner', 'admin', 'member'), leaving all three parameters undocumented.

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 the specific action ('Change') and resource ('user's global role'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling 'n8n_change_project_user_role' by specifying 'global role', though it assumes the agent understands what 'global' means in the n8n context without elaboration.

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 'n8n_change_project_user_role' or other user management tools. No prerequisites are mentioned (e.g., requiring admin privileges), and no exclusions or alternatives are listed.

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