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

Annotations provide destructiveHint=true, indicating mutation. The description adds that the update is reversible and sends no notification, offering some behavioral context beyond annotations. However, it does not cover authorization needs, rate limits, or other 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?

The description is a single sentence that front-loads key information: update, reversibility, no notification. No 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?

With 8 parameters (including nested objects), no output schema, and one required parameter, the description is too minimal. It does not explain return values, error handling, or guidance on using external_id vs user_id.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no new parameter semantics beyond what the input schema already documents; it only mentions the PUT endpoint redundantly.

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 title and description clearly state it updates a user. It specifies the verb 'updates' and the resource 'user record', and distinguishes from siblings like magicbell_create_user (creates) and magicbell_get_user (reads) by implying modification.

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 for modifying user fields. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, but the purpose is clear enough for an agent to differentiate from create and list operations.

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