Update the password for an existing FTP account by specifying the FTP username, associated domain, and new password.
Change an FTP account password
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| user | Yes | FTP username | |
| domain | Yes | Associated domain | |
| password | Yes | New password |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only says 'change', implying a mutation, but does not disclose side effects (e.g., invalidating sessions), prerequisites (e.g., existing account), or any operational consequences. Minimal transparency.
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 that conveys the core purpose without wasted words. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.
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?
The tool is simple with three well-documented parameters, but the description lacks usage guidelines and behavioral disclosure. For a mutation tool with no annotations, the description is adequate for basic invocation but incomplete for nuanced decision-making.
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 clear parameter descriptions for user, domain, and password. The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 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 'Change an FTP account password' uses a specific verb ('Change') and resource ('FTP account password'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like change_ftp_quota and change_email_password. It precisely states the operation without ambiguity.
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 no guidance on when to use this tool, no prerequisites, and no exclusions or alternatives. It is a bare statement of the action with no context for an agent to decide when to invoke it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.