clickup_user_invite

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

No annotations provided, so description carries burden. It notes that inviting a paid member consumes a member seat (side effect). However, it does not clarify other behavioral details such as whether an invitation email is sent, time to effect, or error handling for duplicate emails. Schema covers email uniqueness constraint but description omits it.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with main action, uses of alternatives, and return value. No fluff.

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?

Covers purpose, usage, key side effect, and alternative tool. No output schema, but mentions return object. Could include more detail on the returned user object fields or invitation behavior, but enough for a simple invite operation.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline 3. Description adds context for team_id (default workspace) but otherwise mirrors schema. No significant new meaning beyond schema.

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?

Description clearly states the action (invite a new paid member), resource (workspace), and method (by email). It distinguishes from sibling clickup_guest_invite, indicating scope.

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?

Explicitly says when to use (invite paid members), when not (use clickup_guest_invite for external collaborators), and mentions checking seat availability via clickup_workspace_seats.

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