add_member_role

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

Annotations already indicate that this is not read-only and not destructive, and the description's 'assign' action aligns with those expectations. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotations, such as permission requirements, error cases, or side effects like role reassignment. It is consistent but not enriched.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to understanding the operation. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 low complexity, the required parameters are clearly named, and annotations cover the safety profile, the description provides sufficient context for an agent to understand the operation. It could be improved by mentioning role hierarchy or permission requirements, but these are not essential for basic invocation.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for parameter meaning. It partially does by mapping 'server role' and 'member' to the conceptual roles of role_id, guild_id, and user_id. However, it does not explicitly define each parameter or clarify constraints like guild membership, giving only implicit semantic context.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Assign a server role to a member.' It clearly identifies the primary action and entity, distinguishing it from sibling tools like remove_member_role and list_roles. It is concise, unambiguous, and not a tautology.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention remove_member_role or any condition for choosing add_member_role. The implied use case is easy to infer from the verb, but there is no explicit context or exclusion.

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