users_reset_user_password

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states the primary side effect (sending a password reset email) but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as permission requirements, idempotency, rate limits, or what the user experience entails beyond the email being triggered.

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, clear sentence of eight words. Every word contributes to the core purpose, with no redundant phrasing or filler.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is largely complete: it names the action and the target. It could optionally mention that this only triggers an email and does not directly change the password, but that omission is minor given the simplicity of the tool.

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?

The schema already fully describes the only parameter 'user_id' with 'User to reset,' and the description reinforces this by saying 'for a user account.' Since schema coverage is 100%, the description adds no new parameter meaning, placing it at the baseline of 3.

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 uses a specific verb 'Trigger' and names the resource 'a password reset email for a user account.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling user management tools like users_update_user or users_get_user, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as users_update_user, which might also change user credentials. The description implies a use case but does not explicitly state contexts, exclusions, or alternative tools.

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