Enable or disable user

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. However, the description adds no extra behavioral context, such as impact on user sessions or authentication, which would be valuable beyond what annotations provide.

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, clear sentence that is front-loaded and concise. Every word earns its place, though the brevity sacrifices some helpful details that could be included without becoming verbose.

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 toggle operation with few parameters, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks context about side effects (e.g., logging out active sessions) and does not leverage the opportunity to add value beyond the schema. Given the presence of sibling tools, more completeness would help the AI choose 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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage (no descriptions for 'id' or 'enabled'). The description does not explain the meaning of these parameters, leaving the AI to infer from names alone. This is insufficient for a complete 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 title and description clearly state the tool's action: enabling or disabling a user account. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'keycloak_user_update', which could also modify the enabled status, so the unique purpose is not fully distinguished.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'keycloak_user_update' or other user management tools. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., user must exist) or scenarios where this should be preferred.

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