List Project Memberships

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, idempotent behavior. The description adds valuable context: it returns all memberships including inactive ones, and explains pagination response metadata.

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 mostly concise and front-loaded with the main action. However, it includes some redundant detail like the API endpoint path, which slightly reduces efficiency.

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 lack of an output schema, the description covers purpose, parameters, and behavioral traits well. It mentions pagination metadata but does not detail the record structure, which is a minor gap.

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 coverage is 100%. The description explains the required project_id and the purpose of page/per_page for pagination, adding meaning beyond the schema descriptions.

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 all project memberships, including inactive ones. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create/delete/bulk operations by focusing on enumeration and filtering.

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 specifies when to use the tool (for paginated overview, finding IDs, filtering) but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or direct to alternative tools like show_project_membership.

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