add_drive_members

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

The description discloses that member resolution occurs and that the member list is replaced, but this contradicts the tool name's 'add' and the annotation destructiveHint=false (replacing is destructive). The behavioral intent is unclear, and important details like what happens if a member doesn't resolve are missing.

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 sentence, which is concise, but it contains a confusing internal contradiction ('add' vs 'replace') that reduces clarity. It could be rewritten to be more straightforward without sacrificing brevity.

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 presence of an output schema and only two parameters, the description should clarify whether members are added incrementally or replace the entire list, error handling for unresolvable members, and prerequisites (e.g., does the drive exist?). The current description leaves these 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?

While schema coverage is 100%, the description adds significant meaning by explaining that members accept UUIDs, emails, or names and are resolved to Huly account UUIDs. This aids correct parameter usage beyond the schema's generic 'a string that will be trimmed' for each parameter.

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 tool's purpose: 'Idempotently add members to an existing Drive.' The verb 'add' and resource 'Drive' are specific, and the description differentiates from siblings like 'remove_drive_members' and 'add_space_members' by specifying the resource type (Drive vs. Space) and action (add vs. remove).

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 does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It mentions that members can be UUIDs, emails, or names, but it ambiguously states 'before replacing the Drive member list,' which conflicts with the tool name's 'add' semantics. This could mislead an agent into thinking it replaces rather than adds, and no alternatives are mentioned.

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