create_user

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the burden. It discloses the auth requirement, the password generation/emailing behavior, the deliberate exclusion of a password parameter, and the consequence of disabling send_information. This goes beyond basic expectations and prevents misuse.

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 well-organized, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence carries weight. The Args list is clear and scannable, with no redundant or filler content.

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 complexity and the presence of an output schema, the description covers all essential behavioral aspects: prerequisites, password lifecycle, parameter semantics, and fallback instructions. It is complete enough for an agent to invoke the tool correctly and anticipate the outcome.

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%, so the description must compensate. It fully does: each parameter is explained with functional meaning (e.g., email doubles as credential delivery, admin grants privileges, send_information controls login viability). This adds substantial value over the raw schema.

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 opens with "Create a user," a specific verb-resource pair that clearly states the tool's function. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_group or create_issue by focusing on user creation and adding unique context about password handling.

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 clear usage context: requires administrator privileges, explains that password is generated and emailed, and gives an alternative (web UI) for manual password setting. It doesn't explicitly contrast with other user-related tools (e.g., update_user), but the guidance is sufficient for correct use.

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