update_sub_user

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so safety context is provided. The description adds the vague note that it 'Changes the account,' which hints at account-level impact but does not explain permissions, reversibility, or null-field behavior.

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 short sentences with no wasted text, and the core action is front-loaded. The brevity is appropriate for a simple update tool.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and annotations cover the safety profile. However, with 0% schema description coverage, the description is still too thin on parameter behavior and account impact for fully confident invocation.

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%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It maps loosely to traffic_limit and is_traffic_limited, but does not explain the required sub_user_id or the null/default semantics of the optional fields.

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 states a specific verb and scope: changing a sub-user's traffic limit or toggling that limit. This distinguishes it from siblings like reset_sub_user_usage, delete_sub_user, and list_sub_users, though it does not name any sibling explicitly.

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?

It implies when the tool is used by describing the update action, but gives no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or comparison to alternatives such as reset_sub_user_usage. The agent must infer usage conditions from the tool name and sibling list.

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