add_member

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only notes the owner-only restriction and the action of adding/inviting, but lacks details on side effects (e.g., whether an invitation email is sent, if the member must accept, or what happens if the email is already a member).

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 concise (one sentence) and front-loaded. Every word adds value, but it is almost too brief, leaving out some context that could improve understanding without adding significant length.

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 tool's simplicity (3 parameters, no output schema), the description covers the basic purpose and a key constraint. However, it does not explain the role parameter's significance beyond what the schema provides, nor does it address any prerequisites or post-conditions (e.g., if the invite can be rescinded via remove_member).

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%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions (id, email, role). The role enum values are already documented in the schema.

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 clearly states the action: 'Add (invite) a member to the sheet.' It uses a specific verb ('add') and identifies the resource ('member' on a sheet), distinguishing it from sibling tools like remove_member and update_member_role.

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 mentions a constraint ('Only the owner can execute') but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_share_link (which also handles invitations) or list_members. No exclusion criteria are given.

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