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

Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive. The description adds critical behavioral context about authorization constraints (FREE businesses blocked, permission checking) that goes beyond annotations, but doesn't disclose other traits like rate limits or return format.

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 reasonably concise for the amount of information, with the main action front-loaded. However, it is a single block of text; better structuring (e.g., bullet points) could improve readability.

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 tool's complexity (10 parameters, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It covers usage permissions and sorting but neglects most filtering and pagination parameters, leaving significant gaps for the agent to interpret the input schema's enum values and other fields.

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 has 10 parameters with 0% description coverage. The description only touches on communityId implicitly and sorting by subscriptionInfo.signUpDate. It does not explain other parameters like role, pageNo, status, etc., leaving the agent with insufficient guidance.

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 it lists members for a community managed by the authenticated user, distinguishing it from other list tools like list_business_members. It specifies sorting by subscriptionInfo.signUpDate, making the action specific.

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 instructs to check business permissions before offering the tool, mentions FREE businesses cannot use it, requires calling check_business_tool_access, and provides steps for warnings and resubscribe links. This is comprehensive guidance on when and how to use.

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