Add a user to a group

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

The annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds no additional behavioral context. It does not explain what happens if the user is already in the group, whether workspace_id is required, or any side effects. The description does not contradict annotations but adds minimal value beyond them.

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, but it is under-specified rather than concise. It lacks structure and fails to convey any useful information beyond the title. Every sentence should earn its place, but this single vague sentence does not.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description does not mention return values or expected behavior. Given the existence of sibling tools, the description should clarify its specific role, but it does not. The tool is simple, yet the description leaves out essential context for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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 100%, with each parameter having a description. The tool description itself adds no semantic meaning beyond the schema, but since the schema already documents all parameters, the baseline of 3 is appropriate. No additional parameter relationships or constraints are explained.

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 'Puts someone into a team' is vague and informal. It does not explicitly state that it adds a user to a group, uses the term 'team' instead of 'group', and fails to distinguish from sibling tools like remove_user_from_group or update_user_group. The title is clearer than the description.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or context such as requiring existing user and group IDs. The description is purely a vague action without any usage context.

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