update_workspace_member

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds the key behavioral constraint that only the role field changes and recommends a confirmation step before updating, which is useful context beyond the 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?

Two focused sentences: the first states the action and required keys, the second states the scope and a pre-check workflow. There is no redundant or filler content.

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 schema covers all parameters, annotations cover the safety profile, and an output schema exists, the description is sufficient for selection and invocation. It includes the purpose, the specific keys, the role enum context, and a confirmation step, though it could briefly hint at alternative member-management tools for non-role updates.

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 covers all three parameters thoroughly, including the role enum and user_id UUID constraints. The description reinforces that role is the only mutable field, adding semantic clarity beyond the schema fields.

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 a specific verb ('Update') and names the exact resource ('workspace member's role') plus the identifying keys ('by workspace_id and user_id'). It distinguishes itself from sibling member tools by explicitly limiting the scope to role changes only.

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 clearly states the tool is for role updates only and tells the agent to use list_workspace_members or get_workspace_member to confirm the current assignment first. It does not explicitly name alternative mutation tools (e.g., remove_workspace_member), but the scope exclusion ('Only the role changes here') provides clear when-to-use guidance.

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