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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safe-read profile is covered structurally. The description adds value by enumerating the fields returned (price, duration, allotment, active member count, visibility), but says nothing about pagination behavior despite page/page_size existing, nor about auth or rate limits.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence naming the resource and its returned attributes, plus a compact API endpoint reference. No filler; every clause earns its place.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the returned fields, which is the key gap it must fill. Remaining omissions — pagination guidance and the distinction from customer-membership siblings — are modest but real for a 9-parameter list tool.

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%, so all nine parameters are already documented in the schema, establishing a baseline of 3. The description's listed attributes (price, duration, allotment) describe output fields rather than the filter semantics of for_sale, is_dropin, permits_registration_for_event, etc., so it adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema.

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 (List) and resource (memberships), and clarifies the resource as 'membership products the business sells — packs, recurring and prepaid plans', which implicitly separates it from the per-customer siblings goteamup_list_customer_memberships and goteamup_get_customer_membership. It does not explicitly name those alternatives, so it falls short of a 5.

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 never says when to reach for this tool versus goteamup_list_customer_memberships or goteamup_get_customer_membership, nor does it mention prerequisites or pagination workflow. Usage must be inferred entirely from the resource name.

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