update_device_password

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses nothing. It does not state whether oldPass is validated, whether existing sessions or SSH keys are invalidated, whether the change is reversible, or what permissions are required for a credential-changing mutation.

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?

Three words with no wasted padding, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness. The single phrase is front-loaded yet carries no actionable content.

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?

A security-sensitive mutation with two undocumented required parameters, no annotations, and no output schema needs substantially more disclosure. Nothing an agent would need to call this safely — target identification, effect on active sessions, validation behavior — is present.

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% and both parameters (oldPass, newPass) are bare strings with no schema descriptions. The description adds no meaning about the old/new password relationship, format constraints, or validation rules, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 device password" is essentially the tool name (update_device_password) with underscores removed — a tautological restatement rather than an explanation of what the tool does. It identifies a verb and a resource but adds no scope, no target device identification, and no differentiation from siblings like update_device or update_device_by_file.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternative tools such as update_device or update_device_by_file. An agent gets no signal about when this tool is the correct choice versus the broader device-update siblings.

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