set_user_password

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavior disclosure. It describes the action as password modification (destructive), and explains parameter usage differences. However, it does not mention potential side effects like session invalidation or email notifications, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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 two efficient sentences. The first sentence states the overall purpose, the second breaks down the three usage modes with required parameters. No unnecessary words, well-structured for quick scanning.

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the tool's main functionality and the critical parameter differences. It misses some potential details like password strength requirements or token invalidation, but for a tool with clear modes and good schema coverage, it is largely complete.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage of parameter descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the semantic difference between the three modes and linking current_password to change scenarios, and mentioning the project setting (allow_password_set) that affects the set scenario, which is not in 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 explicitly states the tool's purpose: 'Change, reset, or set a user's password.' It further elaborates three distinct scenarios (change, reset via magic link, set for passwordless users), making it very clear what the tool does and distinguishing between different use cases.

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 clear context for when to use each mode: change requires current_password, reset only new_password, and set requires project setting allow_password_set=true. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives or state when not to use, but the context is sufficient for correct selection among siblings.

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