scim_users_update

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It states the operation is an update (mutation) but does not disclose permission requirements beyond what the schema's apiKey description implies, does not describe how partial updates or omissions are handled, and provides no information on reversibility or response behavior.

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 short sentence, which is concise and front-loaded. However, its brevity is a result of under-specification rather than efficient coverage of necessary details.

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 mutation tool with 8 parameters (including a nested permissions object), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It fails to explain what can be updated, how partial updates work, permission requirements, or error conditions, leaving significant gaps for an agent to infer.

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 schema already documents all 8 parameters with clear descriptions. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, which is acceptable at baseline when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Update a dashboard user account' restates the tool name with only mild added detail ('dashboard user account'). It identifies the basic verb+resource but is not specific about what can be updated and does not distinguish scim_users_update from siblings like users_identify, scim_users_create, or scim_users_delete.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as users_identify (which also updates a user profile) or scim_users_create. The implied usage is that it updates an existing SCIM user, but no prerequisites, exclusions, or alternatives are named.

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