Change a member's role in a workspace (project admin/owner).

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

The description only says 'Change', implying a mutation, but provides no details on side effects, permissions required, rate limits, or what happens if the role doesn't exist. Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, so no added value. With no output schema description, the return value is left to the schema.

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, concise but lacking any structure. It repeats the title almost verbatim. While brevity is good, the description omits essential details, making it under-specified.

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 that this is a mutation tool with 4 parameters (3 required) and an output schema, the description should provide context about the operation's effects, permissions, and return value. It fails to do so, leaving the agent with minimal guidance.

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 description does not explain any parameters. Schema coverage is only 25% (just 'role' has a description). The tool description should have clarified the purpose of 'project_id', 'user_id', and 'x-api-key', but it adds nothing. Users must rely solely on the schema for parameter meaning.

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?

Tautological: description restates name/title.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'add_member' or 'remove_member'. No mention of prerequisites, such as requiring an existing member or specific permissions. The description simply restates the function without context.

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