Reactivate requester

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

Annotations already declare this is a non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive operation. The description adds the useful state requirement that the requester must be deactivated, but does not explain side effects, required permissions, or what happens if the requester is already active.

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?

One short sentence with no redundant wording. The operation and target state are front-loaded and immediately understandable.

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?

For a simple one-parameter mutation with annotations and an output schema available, the description is nearly complete. The only meaningful omission is explicit prerequisite or permission information, but that is not strictly required for correct 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 100%, so the single requester_id parameter is already documented. The description does not add format details or constraints beyond the schema, which is acceptable at baseline when the schema carries the parameter documentation.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: reactivate a requester. The qualifier 'deactivated' distinguishes the operation from related tools like deactivate_requester and reactivate_agent, though it does not explicitly name siblings.

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?

Usage is implied by the name and by the 'deactivated' precondition, making it clear this applies to an inactive requester. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to use this versus alternatives or about prerequisites such as permissions.

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