hmc_create_user

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing side effects. It explicitly warns 'This creates a real account — confirm the taskrole before calling' and clarifies that password is initial and pwage controls expiration. However, it does not mention required permissions, behavior on duplicate usernames, or irreversibility, leaving some gaps 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 compact, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and every sentence contributes value. It covers parameter semantics, an important side-effect warning, and the return type without any wasted words.

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?

The description provides sufficient information for a create operation: purpose, all parameter meanings, a critical side-effect warning, and return value. Since an output schema exists, the return dict mention is a bonus. It loses a point for not covering alternatives or prerequisites, but overall it is complete enough for 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%, but the description compensates fully by explaining every parameter: name is the login username, taskrole controls permissions with examples, password is the initial password, description is optional, and pwage is expiration in days with 0 meaning never. This adds substantial meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 opens with 'Create a new HMC local user account,' which clearly identifies the verb, the resource, and the scope (local user). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like hmc_delete_user, hmc_modify_user, and hmc_users, making the purpose unmistakable.

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 gives clear context for when to use this tool (to create a user) and includes a caution to confirm the taskrole. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or point to alternatives such as hmc_modify_user or hmc_delete_user, so guidance is more implied than explicit.

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