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

Description mentions '[Auth Required]', informing about authentication. The 'List' verb implies read-only behavior, but not explicitly stated. No annotations are present, so description carries full burden. It could disclose more (e.g., no side effects) but basic transparency is provided.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with auth requirement. Efficient but lacks some context. Could be considered slightly under-specified, but for a simple tool it's acceptable.

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?

No output schema, so description could explain return format or pagination. It does not. However, the tool is simple with one parameter and clear purpose. Still, completeness is moderate given missing behavioral and output details.

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% and the parameter 'contract_id' is described as 'Contract ID'. Description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is 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?

Description uses specific verb 'List' and resource 'members (users and agents) of a contract'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling 'add-contract-member' (add vs list) and 'get-contract' (contract details vs 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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. Only mentions auth required. Does not indicate that this is for listing only, while other operations like adding are covered by siblings. The sibling list provides implicit context but description itself lacks explicit direction.

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