list_group_memberships

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses bounded-page behavior, that only ordinary memberships in ordinary groups are returned, and that unknown/removed people yield found: false. This gives an agent useful expectations about output and edge cases.

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?

Three concise sentences, each carrying distinct value: what the tool does, how to identify the person, and what filtering/edge-case behavior to expect. No filler or redundancy.

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?

The description is complete enough for a read-only list tool with an existing output schema: it covers person resolution, filtering, and not-found semantics. The only minor gap is no explicit mention of pagination mechanics beyond 'bounded page', but the output schema likely covers that.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates for person and person_id by explaining their relationship to resolve_person and inline resolution. It does not explicitly explain the limit parameter, but 'bounded page' plus the schema default of 50 provides reasonable guidance.

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 states a specific verb ('Return'), a clear resource ('one person's recorded group memberships'), and a scope ('bounded page'). It is immediately distinguishable from sibling tools like find_groups, get_group, and add_group_membership.

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?

Provides concrete invocation guidance: pass person_id from resolve_person, or pass person as a name/alias to resolve inline. It does not explicitly name alternative tools, but the context makes it clear this is for listing an individual's memberships rather than searching or mutating groups.

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