superset_group_add_users

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

The description discloses the read-modify-write pattern: 'fetches current group users, merges in new ones, and updates the group.' This is key behavioral context beyond the simple 'Add users' phrasing. It doesn't mention error cases or idempotency, but for a tool with no annotations, it carries the burden well.

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?

Two short paragraphs, with a clear Args list. Every sentence adds value, no fluff.

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 simple two-parameter interface, the description explains the purpose, the merge behavior, and the parameters. An output schema exists, so return format is covered. No critical gaps.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description provides explicit parameter meanings: 'group_id: Group ID' and 'user_ids: List of user IDs to add.' This fully compensates for the schema's lack of description.

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 states exactly what it does: 'Add users to a group without removing existing ones.' This clearly distinguishes it from superset_group_remove_users and other group-related tools, using a specific verb and resource.

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?

It explains the convenience behavior (fetches, merges, updates) and implies it's an additive operation. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives, but the tool name and context provide enough differentiation. Could mention when to use this instead of group_update, but not necessary.

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