feishu_chat_members

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: authentication context ('以用户的身份' - as a user), exclusion of bot members, and that it returns member information including ID and name. However, it doesn't mention pagination behavior (implied by parameters but not described), rate limits, error conditions, or what happens with invalid chat_id.

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 appropriately sized with two sentences. The first sentence states the core purpose and authentication context, while the second adds important behavioral constraint about bot members. It's front-loaded with essential information and avoids unnecessary elaboration.

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 read operation with 4 parameters, 75% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description provides adequate but incomplete context. It covers the main purpose and a key constraint (no bot members), but lacks details about return format beyond '成员信息，包含成员 ID、姓名等' (member information including ID, name, etc.), pagination behavior, or error handling.

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 75% (3 of 4 parameters have descriptions), so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by implicitly explaining the chat_id parameter's purpose ('获取指定群组的成员列表' - get member list of specified group) and the member information returned, which helps understand the tool's overall function beyond individual parameters.

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 specific action ('获取指定群组的成员列表' - get member list of specified group), resource ('群组' - group), and scope ('以用户的身份' - as a user). It distinguishes from potential siblings by specifying it returns human members only ('不会返回群组内的机器人成员' - won't return bot members), which is a unique constraint not implied by the tool name alone.

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 implies usage context ('以用户的身份' - as a user) but doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. Among siblings, there's no direct alternative for fetching chat members, so the lack of explicit comparison is understandable, but no guidance on prerequisites or exclusions is provided.

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