user_local_update

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'update' without specifying whether it performs a partial or full replacement, what happens to omitted fields, or any side effects, permissions, or limits. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 short sentence, which is under-specified for a tool with 6 parameters. While concise, it fails to provide essential context, making it more of a tautology than a helpful summary.

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?

Despite high schema coverage, the description lacks operational context such as update semantics (partial vs full), required fields beyond 'name', and expected output. Given the complexity of the tool (6 parameters, no annotations, no output schema in description), this is inadequate.

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 100% description coverage, so each parameter already has a semantic explanation. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, establishing a baseline score of 3.

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 'Update a local user account' clearly states the action (update) and the resource (local user account). It effectively distinguishes the tool from sibling tools like user_local_create, user_local_delete, etc., which have different actions.

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 (e.g., creating a new user via user_local_create or retrieving info via user_local_get). There is no mention of prerequisites such as required permissions or VDOM context, leaving the agent uncertain about appropriate usage.

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