get_member_organizations

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 accurately describes the read-only nature of the operation but does not elaborate on edge cases such as invalid member IDs, pagination, or default response behavior. This is adequate for a simple read tool but adds minimal value beyond the core function.

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 two short sentences with no filler. The second sentence reinforces the first by clarifying the term 'workspaces,' adding value without redundancy. Every word 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?

Given the tool's simplicity and the presence of a fully described schema, the description provides sufficient context for an agent to select and invoke the tool. It could mention that the result is a list, but the name and sibling context already imply that. The description is adequately complete for this complexity level.

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 already provides descriptions for all parameters (100% coverage), so the description does not need to repeat them. The description adds no additional insight into parameter usage or relationships, placing it at the baseline of 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 clearly states the tool's function with a specific verb and resource: 'Get organizations that a member belongs to.' It distinguishes this tool from siblings like get_member_boards and get_member_cards by focusing on organizations/workspaces, making the purpose unmistakable.

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 phrase 'Use this to see what workspaces a member is part of' provides a clear context for when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or name sibling tools, so it lacks the explicit when-not-to-use guidance that would merit a 5.

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