add_business_user

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions the env var requirement but omits critical details such as whether the operation is reversible, required permissions, error handling for existing users, or rate limits. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient.

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 with no unnecessary words. It effectively communicates the core action and a key prerequisite. However, it could be slightly longer to include additional behavioral context without becoming verbose.

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 tool has only two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose and a prerequisite. However, it lacks completeness for a mutation tool, missing details about error scenarios, duplicate users, or the response after addition. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters. The description adds just the context 'by email', which relates to the email parameter but does not significantly enhance understanding beyond the schema. The role parameter is not addressed in the description. 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 clearly states the action ('Add'), the resource ('user to the configured business'), and the method ('by email'). It also specifies a required environment variable (META_BUSINESS_ID). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'remove_business_user' or 'create_system_user'.

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 clear context for when to use the tool (adding a user to the business via email) and a prerequisite (the META_BUSINESS_ID env var must be set). However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives, which would improve the score.

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