user_unlock

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full disclosure burden. While it identifies the target state (locked), it omits critical mutation behaviors: required permissions/admin rights, idempotency (can unlock an unlocked user?), return value structure, and error cases (user not found, not locked). For a state-changing operation, this is insufficient behavioral context.

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 sentences total. First establishes purpose and resource, second provides usage condition. Zero redundant text. Information density is high with no repetition of tool name or tautology.

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?

Adequate for a zero-parameter tool with clear singular purpose, but gaps remain for a state-changing operation: no output schema exists, yet description doesn't explain success indicators, failure modes, or side effects. Given the security-sensitive nature of account unlocking, additional behavioral context would improve completeness.

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?

Input schema has 0 parameters, establishing baseline 4 per scoring rules. Description appropriately focuses on business logic rather than parameter semantics since none exist. No parameter documentation gaps to compensate for.

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?

Description provides specific verb ('Unlock') + resource ('Operaton user account') + state condition ('locked'). Clearly distinguishes from sibling user management tools (user_create, user_updatePassword, user_updateProfile) by addressing the specific locked account state.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'Use when a user has been locked due to failed login attempts.' Provides clear trigger condition for selection. Lacks explicit 'when not to use' or alternative suggestions, but the positive guidance is specific enough for correct invocation.

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