user_edit

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose that this is a write operation and requires confirmation, which is meaningful behavioral context beyond the tool name. However, it omits details about side effects, failure modes, or what happens if confirmation is missing.

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 compact sentence that front-loads the core action and the most important behavioral caveat. It is appropriately concise, though it sacrifices parameter and usage detail for brevity.

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?

This is a write operation with a confirmation flow, four undocumented parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description does not explain the confirmation workflow, what 'param' represents, or how to obtain user_code/confirmation_id, so an agent cannot reliably invoke the tool 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 description coverage is 0%, and the description provides no explanation for any of the four parameters: param, user_code, confirm_token, or confirmation_id. The single required parameter 'param' is completely opaque, leaving an agent unable to construct a valid request.

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?

Description states a specific verb and resource: 'Edit user profile'. It also flags the write nature and confirmation requirement, which helps distinguish it from read-only siblings. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from similarly named user_set or user_setdefault, so it falls just short of full clarity.

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 about when to use this tool instead of alternatives like user_set or user_setdefault. The phrase 'requires confirmation' hints at a specific flow, but there is no explanation of prerequisites, when confirmation is needed, or how this relates to sibling user tools.

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