update_user_storage

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden, but it only says 'Update,' implying mutation without detailing side effects, permission requirements, idempotency, or whether the change is reversible. The lack of any additional behavioral context leaves the agent uncertain about the operation's impact.

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 with no wasted words. It is efficient, though the brevity comes at the cost of leaving critical usage and parameter context unaddressed.

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?

Although an output schema exists, the description omits essential operational context such as identifier semantics, the meaning/units of storage_limit, and how this tool relates to get_user_storage_details. For a three-required-parameter mutation with no annotations, the description is too thin for reliable agent invocation.

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 for explaining zoid, zuid, and storage_limit, but it does not. It only repeats the storage-limit concept and gives no meaning to zoid/zuid or the unit/interpretation of storage_limit.

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 'Update' and the resource 'storage limit for a user,' which makes the tool's basic purpose understandable. It does not explicitly contrast it with sibling get_user_storage_details, but the action/resource pairing is specific enough to avoid major confusion.

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 offers no guidance on when to call this tool instead of alternatives like get_user_storage_details or add_user. It also does not mention any prerequisites, such as whether the user must already exist or whether identifiers like zoid/zuid refer to specific tenant/user IDs.

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