membre

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, and it says nothing about what a successful lookup returns, what happens when the ID does not exist, or whether any permissions are required. For a read-only lookup the risk is low, but the agent is left to discover the failure and return behavior by trial.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, and the lookup key is stated at the end where it is most relevant. It is efficient but borders on under-specification rather than being genuinely well-structured for an agent.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter description coverage, the description is the only source of information and omits the return shape and error semantics. For a one-parameter lookup tool the bar is low, but a sentence on what a member record contains and where the ID comes from would be expected.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0% for the single parameter, so the description must compensate, and it does not. "Par ID" merely restates the schema property name membre_id without specifying the ID format, its source (e.g. a prior search result), or whether it is a snowflake-style string or a username.

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 and resource ("Consulter un membre du serveur") plus the lookup key ("par ID"), which is clear enough to act on. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the sibling tool rechercher_membres, which is the obvious alternative for member lookups.

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 "par ID" implicitly signals that this tool requires a known identifier and is therefore a direct lookup rather than a search, which is minimal implied guidance. There is no explicit when-to-use, no when-not-to-use, and no pointer to rechercher_membres for the case where the agent does not already have an ID.

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