vibemk_add_user_to_group

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

There are no annotations and the description does not disclose side effects, permissions required, idempotency, duplicate handling, or failure modes. The description only restates the action without any behavioral details.

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 short and front-loaded, but it is redundant: 'Add user to contact group' and 'Assign user to contact group' convey the same meaning. The second clause does not earn its place.

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?

The description lacks essential context such as prerequisites (user/group existence), expected effects, potential errors, or output behavior. With no output schema and no additional guidance, an agent may not be able to use this tool correctly in edge cases.

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?

The parameters have descriptions in the schema, but they are tautological ('Username', 'Contact group name') and add no real meaning beyond the field names. Schema coverage is high, so the baseline is 3, but no additional semantic information is provided.

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 a specific action and resource: adding a user to a contact group. It is unambiguous and effectively distinguishes this tool from siblings like remove_user_from_group.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as update_contact_group, create_contact_group, or remove_user_from_group. The only implied usage comes from the tool's name and minimal description.

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