solidtime_member_make_placeholder

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

Annotations already declare the safety profile (readOnly=false, destructive=false, idempotent=false), so the description's job is to add context. It adds the POST endpoint and the dry-run path, but says nothing about what happens to the member's existing time entries, access, or whether the conversion is reversible — the most important behavioral facts for this mutation.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the endpoint and the dry-run caveat. No filler; the only slight inefficiency is restating the confirm semantics already in the schema.

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?

For a three-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers enough to invoke it safely (endpoint, dry-run). It is not complete about consequences — what a placeholder member can/cannot do and whether the change can be undone — which matters given the non-idempotent write.

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 67% and the confirm parameter is already richly documented in the schema, so the description's dry-run sentence is largely redundant. The one undocumented parameter, member_id, gets no explanation of what a member ID is or where to obtain it.

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?

"Turn a member into a placeholder" is a specific verb + resource, and the endpoint path confirms the operation. It doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from close siblings like solidtime_member_update, solidtime_member_remove, or solidtime_member_invite_placeholder, so an agent must infer the boundary.

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 dry-run rule ("Omit confirm for a dry-run") gives concrete invocation guidance repeatedly useful before a mutation. However, there is no statement of when to prefer this over solidtime_member_remove or solidtime_member_invite_placeholder, nor any prerequisite or exclusion.

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