set-user-attributes

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavior disclosure. It only says 'Set user attributes', which implies mutation but does not disclose whether attributes are merged or replaced, any permission requirements, side effects, or what happens to existing attributes. The CRITICAL note is about importance, not behavior.

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 sentence with no wasted words, but the capitalized 'CRITICAL' adds emphasis without substantive information. It is concise but somewhat noisy, earning a 4 rather than a 5.

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 tool's simplicity, the description is too sparse. There is no output schema, no annotations, and no explanation of return values, error cases, or behavior on existing attributes. For a mutation tool with nested objects, this is insufficient.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond the schema; it does not explain how realm or userId are obtained, nor the expected structure of the attributes values beyond what the schema already states.

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 'set' with a clear resource 'user attributes', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get-user-attributes' and 'set-group-attributes'. The parenthetical '(CRITICAL for storing organization data)' emphasizes its specific role in storing org data, further clarifying purpose.

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 implies usage context by noting it is CRITICAL for storing organization data, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives such as 'update-user' or 'get-user-attributes'. No exclusions or alternative guidance are provided, so it earns a middle score.

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