yuque_update_group_user

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It reveals only that this is a PUT (a mutation) and lists role values; it does not disclose permission requirements, whether the change is reversible, or any rate/side-effect behavior.

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?

Very compact and front-loaded with the action and role values. The trailing reference-file pointer ('详见 references/api/group_api.md') is a slightly opaque addition but is functional rather than wasteful.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate: it covers the action, endpoint, and role semantics. It omits any auth/permission context or behavioral side effects that would make it fully self-contained.

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 the schema already documents all four parameters. The description restates the role enum (0=admin,1=member,2=readonly), which duplicates the schema's role description rather than adding new meaning. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Change a group member role') and identifies the underlying endpoint, which lets an agent distinguish it from siblings like yuque_delete_group_user or yuque_get_group_users. It is clear, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate itself from those siblings in prose.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as yuque_delete_group_user or yuque_get_group_users, and no stated preconditions (e.g., admin privileges). The reader must infer usage from the name alone.

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