list_workspace_members

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that org admins automatically have workspace_admin but may not appear explicitly, which is a key behavioral nuance. It implies the list is workspace-specific and non-destructive, though it does not mention pagination or rate limits.

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 three concise sentences, front-loading the main action and adding relevant details. Every sentence adds value, with 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?

Given an output schema exists, the description need not explain return values, but it still describes the output fields appropriately. It covers the org admin caveat, which is important for understanding results. It could mention pagination to match the input schema, but overall it is complete for a simple list 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 coverage is 0%, and the description adds no meaning to the parameters (workspace_id, limit, before_id, after_id). It only describes output fields, not input parameters, leaving the agent without guidance on parameter usage beyond schema types.

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 tool lists members of a specific workspace, providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'list_workspace' or 'list_members' by specifying the scope. The detail about output fields (user_id, workspace_role) further clarifies purpose.

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 description indicates the tool is for listing workspace members, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like 'add_workspace_member' or 'invite_member'. It mentions the org admin exclusion but lacks guidance on when not to use the tool or suggestions for other tools.

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