Update user

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

The description confirms a mutation operation, matching the annotation readOnlyHint=false. It lists the affected fields (email, name, enabled) but does not explicitly state that omitted fields remain unchanged (partial update). Annotations already convey idempotent and non-destructive 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?

The description is a single sentence of 8 words. While concise, it lacks front-loading of critical information such as the required id parameter. It could be slightly longer to add key details without losing conciseness.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and the presence of a sibling tool keycloak_user_set_enabled, the description should explicitly state that this tool supports partial updates (only provided fields are changed) and that it is for existing users. It falls short of providing enough context for correct tool selection.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It mentions 'email, name or enabled flag', but 'name' is ambiguous (firstName/lastName) and it does not explain that the id parameter is required or that other fields are optional. The description adds some meaning but is incomplete.

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 verb 'Update' and the resource 'user's email, name or enabled flag', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like keycloak_user_create, keycloak_user_delete, etc. However, it could be more specific about the scope (partial update) and that it modifies an existing 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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as keycloak_user_set_enabled (which only changes the enabled flag) or keycloak_user_create. The description does not mention prerequisites or context.

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