Add a host to a fleet's static membership

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

The description adds no behavioral detail beyond the annotations: readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=false already imply a mutating, non-idempotent operation. It does not explain whether adding the same host twice is rejected, what happens to effective membership, or any validation or authentication considerations.

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 single sentence is concise and front-loaded, but it is under-specified rather than efficiently informative. It merely restates the title, so it is compact without adding structural value.

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 mutating operation with no output schema and two under-documented parameters, the description is insufficient. An agent would not know which id is which, whether the host must already exist, or what a successful call returns.

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 description coverage and no parameter details in the description, an agent must guess that 'id' refers to the fleet and 'hostId' refers to the host. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema's bare integer/number types and does not compensate for the low coverage.

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?

Tautological: description restates name/title.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus other fleet membership tools such as listing resolved membership or sharing fleets. There are no conditions, prerequisites, or alternatives mentioned.

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