redmine_update_membership

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

The description mentions honoring REDMINE_MCP_READ_ONLY, a useful behavioral trait. However, it does not elaborate on side effects (e.g., replacing roles), error states, or permission requirements, leaving gaps given no annotations.

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 concise with a structured Args block, front-loading the key action. Every sentence serves a purpose without redundancy.

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?

For a simple update tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose, parameter sources, and read-only behavior. It is nearly complete, but missing explicit mention of role replacement behavior.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description adds critical meaning: membership_id is numeric and sourced from list_memberships, role_ids is required and non-empty. This significantly aids agent understanding, though role_ids format (integer list) is implied.

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 states 'Update a membership's roles,' clearly indicating the verb and resource. This distinguishes it from add/remove membership tools, though it could be more specific about replacing roles.

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 use for modifying roles of an existing membership, but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like redmine_add_membership or redmine_remove_membership, nor does it provide when-not guidance.

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