get_club_admins_by_id

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does state 'Read-only operation,' which is helpful, but it omits other behavioral aspects such as pagination behavior (implied by page/per_page params), error conditions (e.g., club not found), or authentication requirements. The minimal disclosure covers the safety profile but not richer behavioral context.

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 compact and to the point, including the endpoint and a clear one-line explanation. It avoids unnecessary verbosity and front-loads the essential purpose. The inclusion of the endpoint is a bonus, though not strictly required. Only a slight inefficiency is the repetition of 'Returns a list' and 'List Club Administrators' which are redundant.

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 simple read-only list operation, the description, combined with the schema, provides enough for an agent to call it correctly. It specifies the resource (club admin list), and the schema covers parameters and pagination defaults. The absence of an output schema means the description needn't detail return values. It might lack mention of error handling or authentication, but these are typically implicit for API tools and not required for basic usability.

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 input schema provides descriptions for all three parameters (id, page, per_page) with 100% coverage. The description itself adds no parameter-specific information, which is acceptable given the schema already documents them. However, it doesn't clarify the relationship between the parameters and the returned data, such as explaining that admins are paginated. This is baseline behavior for 100% schema coverage.

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 states the tool 'lists club administrators' with a specific verb and resource. It names the endpoint GET /clubs/{id}/admins and describes the return as a list of admins for a given club. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_club_members_by_id, the focus on 'administrators' is distinct enough for most agents.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention scenarios where get_club_members_by_id or get_club_activities_by_id might be more appropriate, nor any prerequisites or conditions. The agent is left to infer usage from the name and description alone.

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