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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden and does add real value: it discloses that password data is never returned and that a Druk Asia API key is required and sent automatically via the x-api-key header. It does not state read-only semantics explicitly, nor what happens when the ID is not found or invalid, which matters for a lookup tool with zero annotation coverage.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then two high-value facts (data exclusion and auth requirement). No filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential concerns: what it returns conceptually (member, minus password) and how auth works. The main gap is not-found/error behavior, which is minor for a simple lookup.

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% and there is only one parameter, so the schema already documents `id` fully. The description only restates 'by ID' and adds no format, sourcing, or validation meaning beyond the schema, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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?

"Retrieves a member by ID" gives a specific verb and resource, and the 'by ID' qualifier makes clear it is a single-record fetch rather than a listing. It does not explicitly contrast with create_member or other siblings, but the read-vs-write distinction is obvious from the verb.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no stated prerequisites for obtaining a member ID, and no mention of alternatives or when-not-to-use. Usage is only implied by the word 'Retrieves'.

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