Edit member

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, but the description adds no behavioral context. It does not say which member attributes can be edited, whether the operation requires org admin permissions, or what happens to unspecified fields.

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 extremely short and front-loaded, but under-specification is not conciseness. The parenthetical '(POST alias)' is cryptic and does not earn its place without explaining the alias.

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 5-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and sparse annotations, this description is completely inadequate. It leaves essential parameter semantics and behavioral effects undocumented.

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 schema has 5 parameters with 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain any of them. In particular, the opaque 'form', 'params', and 'json_body' parameters are left entirely undocumented, and even org_id/member_id are only implicitly hinted by the verb.

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 effectively restates the title ('Edit member') and adds only the cryptic parenthetical '(POST alias)'. It does not specify what a member edit includes or distinguish this tool from close siblings like vaultwarden_put_member, vaultwarden_update_membership_type, or vaultwarden_bulk_reinvite_members.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as vaultwarden_put_member or update_membership_type. The '(POST alias)' note hints at an HTTP method alias but provides no actionable selection criteria.

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