users_set_user_role

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a mutation ('change') but does not mention required permissions, reversibility, or side effects. The agent gets no additional context beyond the verb itself.

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, focused sentence that conveys the complete purpose without wasted words. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity and earns its place.

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 two-parameter mutation tool with fully described schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, the absence of annotations or output schema leaves gaps around operational context, such as assumptions about user existence or role validity. It is functional but not rich.

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% since both parameters have meaningful descriptions ('New role to assign' and 'User to modify'). The description adds no extra semantic layer beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Change the access role assigned to a user' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like users_update_user or users_reset_user_password. It directly states the action and target without ambiguity.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only states what it does, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage contexts. No exclusions or alternative tool mentions are present.

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