add_card_member

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action without mentioning side effects, permissions, idempotency, or failure conditions. For example, it doesn't indicate what happens if the user is already a member. This is a mutation tool with no behavioral context, which is a significant gap.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the action with zero filler. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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?

The tool is a mutation with no annotations and no output schema. The description is minimal and doesn't explain return values, prerequisites, error handling, or use cases. For a tool that alters state, this is incomplete. Similar to the 'update_drive' example, more context is needed.

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%, with both parameters already described as 'Card ID' and 'User ID to add as a card member'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline is 3 because the schema handles the documentation, and the description doesn't compensate further.

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 a user as a member of a card.' It specifies the verb 'Add', the resource 'a user', and the target 'a card'. It is unambiguous and distinct from siblings like remove_card_member and update_card_member_role, as it's the only add operation for members.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. However, given the sibling set (remove_card_member, update_card_member_role), the usage is implied: this is the tool for adding a member. There's no context on prerequisites or exclusions, but the implied usage is sufficient for a straightforward operation.

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