weeek_list_members

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden, and for a zero-parameter read it does disclose the shape of what comes back (id + display name) and how the output is consumed elsewhere. It says nothing about scope limits, permissions, or whether the list is paginated/filtered.

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?

Two tight sentences: the first defines the operation and its return, the second delivers the integration guidance. No filler, and the core purpose is front-loaded.

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?

There is no output schema, so describing the returned fields and their downstream use is exactly the missing piece this description supplies. For a simple, parameterless listing tool, nothing further is needed to invoke it correctly.

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 tool takes no parameters, so there is nothing to disambiguate; the baseline for a 0-param tool is 4. The description correctly does not waste space explaining inputs.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (list WEEEK workspace members) and even names the returned fields (id + display name). This cleanly separates it from sibling list operations like weeek_list_projects, weeek_list_boards, and weeek_list_tasks.

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?

Gives a clear reason to call it ('use this to see who exists') and explains the downstream payoff: names returned here can be passed directly into any assignee/watcher/member tool. It does not name a competing alternative or state exclusions, so it falls just short of a 5.

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