bitwarden_get_member

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior itself. While 'Get' implies a read-only operation, it doesn't mention error behaviors, authentication requirements, or edge cases. The output schema covers return structure, but the description adds no further transparency beyond the obvious read nature.

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 highly concise: one sentence for the purpose plus a short argument annotation. No wasted words, and the information is front-loaded with the primary purpose before the parameter detail.

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 an output schema, the description adequately covers the necessary context: it identifies the sole parameter, tells how to obtain it, and states the purpose. It lacks explicit error-case discussion, but that is a minor gap for a get-by-id tool.

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 schema has zero description coverage, but the description explains that member_id is a UUID and directs the user to bitwarden_list_members for obtaining it. This adds semantic meaning that the schema lacks, effectively compensating for the schema's lack of parameter detail.

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 action (Get) and the specific resource (a single organization member's details), distinguishing it from sibling tools like bitwarden_list_members (plural) and mutation tools. The verb and resource are precise and unambiguous.

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?

It provides context by telling the user to obtain the member_id via bitwarden_list_members, which is an alternative tool for a prerequisite step. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast when to use this tool vs. other member-related tools, but the reference to list_members is a useful usage hint.

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