update_user

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

The description discloses the mutating nature and partial update behavior. However, without annotations, it lacks details on idempotency, permissions, or side effects. It adds value by clarifying what fields cannot be changed but could cover more behavioral traits.

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?

Two concise sentences that front-load the purpose and key behaviors. No redundant information; every sentence 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 tool with 9 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description covers core behaviors (partial update, restrictions) and provides a parameter-specific hint. Missing return value and error details, but sufficient for basic usage.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3. The description adds context beyond the schema: partial update semantics and a specific hint for role_id ('Use list_roles to discover valid IDs'). This meaningfully enhances parameter understanding.

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 it updates an existing user with 'Update an existing user.' It specifies only supplied fields are modified and notes that email and account status cannot be changed, distinguishing it from create_user and deactivate_user.

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 provides guidance on partial updates ('Only supplied fields are modified') and explicit restrictions ('Email and account status cannot be changed'). It implies usage for updating existing users but does not explicitly contrast with tools like create_user or deactivate_user.

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