Изменение пароля пользователя S3-хранилища

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

Annotations indicate this is a writing operation (readOnlyHint=false) but are silent on downstream effects. The description discloses a significant behavioral consequence: 'После смены пароля нужно обновить конфигурацию всех клиентов' (after changing the password, you need to update the configuration of all clients). This adds value beyond annotations and helps the agent anticipate side effects.

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 concise and front-loaded with the primary action. It consists of two sentences, the first stating the core function and the second providing a crucial operational note. No wasted words.

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 mutation tool with annotations and complete schema coverage, the description covers the main action and an important side-effect (client config update). It does not explain return values or error cases, but given the lack of an output schema and the straightforward nature of the update, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 descriptions cover both parameters, but the description adds nuance by specifying the user is an administrator (пользователя-администратора), which clarifies the intended user_id. This is extra meaning beyond the generic schema description 'ID пользователя S3-хранилища'. The secret_key parameter is also mentioned in context, so the description complements the schema.

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 clearly states the function: 'Меняет secret_key пользователя-администратора S3-хранилища' (Changes the secret_key of the S3 storage administrator user). It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes this from sibling update tools by specifying it targets the S3 storage administrator user's secret key/password.

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?

The description implies usage when rotating the admin user's secret_key, but does not explicitly state when to use it vs alternatives or provide exclusions. It does add a post-condition about updating client configurations, which is useful context, but lacks direct guidance on tool selection.

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