list_organization_members

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

With no annotations, the description alone should disclose behavior. It only states the basic listing action, omitting details on pagination, error handling, authentication needs, or expected response structure.

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 a single sentence that is concise and front-loaded. It contains no extraneous information, though it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness.

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 tool has three parameters and no output schema, the description fails to clarify pagination behavior, default values, or the scope of members returned. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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?

All three parameters (page, perPage, organizationId) are described in the input schema with 100% coverage. The description adds no further context beyond what is already in the schema, earning a baseline score.

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 'list user members in an organization' clearly indicates the action (list) and resource (user members within an organization). It is specific and distinguishes from siblings like 'search_organization_members', though it does not explicitly contrast with similar list tools.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_organization_members' or 'get_organization_member_info'. There is no advice on prerequisites or exclusions.

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