user_updatePassword

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It successfully adds critical behavioral context about authentication requirements (current password for non-admins) and return values ('Returns confirmation on success'), but omits error conditions, reversibility, or side effects.

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?

Three sentences efficiently structured: purpose statement, authentication requirement, and return value description. No redundancy or wasted words; each sentence earns its place by conveying distinct information not present in structured fields.

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?

Without annotations or an output schema, the description partially compensates by mentioning return behavior and auth requirements. However, for a sensitive security operation (password update), the absence of error case documentation, permission details for admins, or payload structure leaves gaps.

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 contains zero parameters (empty properties object), which per evaluation rules establishes a baseline score of 4. The description mentions password requirements but does not explicitly define parameter names or types, though this appears to be a schema limitation rather than a description gap.

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 uses a specific verb ('Update') with a specific resource ('the password for an existing Operaton user'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like user_updateProfile (which handles profile data) and user_create/user_delete.

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 explicit usage constraints ('Requires the current password for non-admin users'), indicating when specific credentials are needed. However, it does not explicitly contrast with user_unlock or state when to prefer this over password reset workflows.

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