updateMembership

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

The description only says 'Update membership', which is a mutation consistent with the annotation readOnlyHint=false. However, it discloses no additional behavioral traits such as side effects, permission requirements, or what data is modified. It adds no value beyond the annotation and the tool name itself.

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 short phrase, but it is under-specified rather than concise. It lacks essential details, making it unhelpful. While it is front-loaded (the only content is the purpose), it does not earn its place because it adds almost no informative value.

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 complexity of the input schema (nested objects, required fields) and the absence of an output schema, the description is completely inadequate. It does not explain what the tool does beyond the generic verb, nor does it clarify the required context like the meaning of membershipId or the structure of the body. This is a severely under-specified 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 0%, so the description carries the full burden of explaining the parameters. It does not even mention pathParams, bodyParams, or the role_ids field. The description provides no meaning beyond what the schema already encodes, failing to compensate for the lack of parameter descriptions.

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 verb ('Update') and a resource ('membership'), but it is extremely terse and does not specify which aspects of the membership are updated. It does distinguish from sibling tools like createMembership, getMembership, and deleteMembership, but lacks the specificity that would help an agent understand the exact operation (e.g., updating role IDs).

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. It does not mention prerequisites, typical scenarios, or contrast with updateIssue or other update tools. There is no contextual information to help an agent decide when to call it.

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