create_membership

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

Annotations already disclose that this is a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent mutation. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations by explaining that the preview is validated by OpenProject and that problems are returned in validation_errors. It does not contradict the annotations.

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 two short sentences, front-loads the core action, and contains no wasted wording. Both sentences contribute useful information.

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 schema and annotations are rich enough to support calling the tool, but there is no output schema. The description notes validation_errors but does not explain the successful return value or summarize the confirm/apply workflow, leaving some contextual gaps for a mutation tool.

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 all five parameters are already well documented in the input schema. The description does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond that, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Create a project membership.' This clearly distinguishes it from update_membership and delete_membership by operation type, though it does not explicitly name or route the agent away from those siblings.

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 say when to use create_membership versus update_membership, when not to use it, or what prerequisites are needed. The mention of preview validation hints at the tool's workflow but does not provide explicit usage guidance.

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