update_sc_service_user

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It states 'Only provided fields are changed', conveying a partial update (patch) behavior, which is helpful. However, it omits details like required permissions, potential side effects, or whether the operation is destructive.

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 just two sentences, both front-loaded. Every word is necessary and no redundant information is present.

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 simplicity (5 parameters, 2 required) and the presence of an output schema (not shown), the description is adequate for basic understanding. However, it lacks context on identification (repo_name and username likely form a composite key) and any potential impacts of updating sensitive fields.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description goes beyond by clarifying that only provided fields are updated, which explains the semantics of optional parameters (they are only changed if included). This adds meaningful context beyond the schema's field descriptions.

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 'Update a service user' with a specific verb and resource. It effectively distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like create_sc_service_user, get_sc_service_user, and delete_sc_service_user, which have different operations.

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 versus alternatives (e.g., create_sc_service_user for new users, or other update tools). It does not specify prerequisites or scenarios where update should be avoided.

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