cm_add_person

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

With no annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, etc.), the description fully bears the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Add' (implying mutation) but does not disclose side effects (e.g., triggers confirmation email, overwrites existing person), authentication requirements, or rate limits. Critical behavioral context is 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, tightly focused sentence with no extraneous words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it easily scannable for an AI agent.

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 no output schema, the description does not mention return values (e.g., person ID or status). The tool is simple (5 params, no nesting), so the minimal description is adequate but not rich. It could be improved by stating the output or confirming the action is synchronous.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. It does not explain complex fields like AccessLevel (bitmask) or provide formatting guidance, but the schema already covers those details adequately.

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 'Add a new person to a client account' is a specific verb+resource pair. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like cm_add_admin (adds an admin) or cm_add_subscriber (adds a subscriber), as it targets adding a person with a different role.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., cm_add_admin, cm_add_subscriber). It does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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