update_user

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

With no annotations and a minimal description, the tool's behavior is opaque. There is no disclosure of side effects, required permissions, error handling, or whether the update is partial or full replacement.

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 overly concise at three words, lacking essential details. While brevity is valued, it sacrifices clarity and completeness, making it unhelpful for effective tool selection.

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 the complexity of the tool (three required params, nested object, no output schema), the description fails to provide sufficient context. It should explain the expected structure of 'user_data', update semantics, and any return or error information.

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 is documented. However, the description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as the format or allowed fields within 'user_data'. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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', making the basic purpose understandable. However, it lacks differentiation from sibling tools like 'create_user' or 'delete_user', as it doesn't specify what aspects of the user can be updated.

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 such as 'update_user_profile' or 'update_user_credential_label'. The description does not mention prerequisites or context for use.

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