List members

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

The description adds paging behavior and cursor continuation beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. It doesn't deeply describe response shape or edge cases, but given the annotation already signals safety, the added paging context is valuable.

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 short sentences that immediately state purpose, pagination mechanics, and the preferred alternative. No wasted words.

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?

For a simple list tool with full schema descriptions and a readOnly annotation, the description is sufficient to understand the core behavior. It covers pagination and alternative tool usage, though it doesn't mention default guild behavior or output format, which are reasonably implied.

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 100%, so parameters are already well-documented. The description only reinforces the 'after' cursor behavior, adding marginal value beyond the schema.

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 this is a 'paged roster of server members', using a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from search_members, making its purpose 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?

Explicitly says to use search_members for finding specific people, and explains the pagination flow with 'Pass after with the last id to continue'. This gives clear guidance on when to use the tool and how to use the cursor.

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