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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose important behavioral context: it is an informational permissions view, and access is scoped so owners see everyone while others see only themselves. It does not explicitly state that it is read-only, but the phrasing strongly implies retrieval rather than mutation.

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 three compact sentences with the core purpose front-loaded, followed by useful visibility rules. Every sentence contributes information without unnecessary repetition.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the visibility rules are helpful. However, for a two-parameter tool with no annotation coverage and no schema parameter descriptions, the missing explanation of person_id and optionality leaves the definition only minimally complete.

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 0%, so the description should clarify parameter behavior. It mentions a shop and worker, loosely implying shop_id and person_id, but never explains the optional person_id or what happens when it is omitted, leaving key invocation semantics unclear.

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 identifies the resource as per-worker permissions in a shop and lists the specific permission dimensions. It does not explicitly state the verb (get/list) and does not name sibling tools such as members_list or members_changeRole for differentiation.

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 explains visibility rules (owner sees everyone, others see themselves) but gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like members_list or members_changeRole. Usage is only implied.

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