list_team_members

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

With no annotations and a minimal description, the tool does not disclose behavioral aspects like authentication requirements, error handling, rate limits, or whether the list is paginated. This leaves the agent uncertain about operational details.

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 extremely concise at five words, front-loading the key action and resource. Every word is efficient and necessary.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description is insufficiently complete. It omits expected response format, possible errors, and whether the operation is idempotent or requires specific permissions, leaving gaps for agent decision-making.

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?

The parameter 'team_id' has a schema description ('The ID of the team'), and the tool description aligns with it. However, no additional meaning is added beyond the schema. With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3.

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 'List all members of a team' clearly specifies the action (list) and resource (members of a team), distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_channel_members and list_chat_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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as list_channel_members for channel-specific members or list_teams for teams overview. No prerequisites or context are mentioned.

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