get_brand_members

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the disclosure burden. It discloses that only 'active' members are listed and specifies the returned fields (role, id, name, email). However, it does not mention authentication, error behavior, or side effects, though 'List' implies a read-only operation. This is acceptable but not overly detailed.

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 14-word sentence that front-loads the action ('List') and resource, with no redundant or extraneous information. It is efficiently written and easy to parse.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description compensates by disclosing the return fields (role, user info with id/name/email) and the 'active' filter. It does not mention ordering or pagination, but for a simple one-parameter list tool with an optional parameter, the description is nearly complete.

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 already describes brandId as 'Brand ID (uses active brand if omitted)' with 100% coverage. The tool description merely says 'of a brand,' which does not add meaning beyond the schema. Thus, the description adds no new parameter context.

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 action ('List'), the resource ('active members of a brand'), and the return data ('role and user info (id, name, email)'). It is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like get_brand_info, which likely returns brand-level details rather than member listings.

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 when you need to retrieve a brand's active members, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or provide any exclusions. No direct comparison to similar tools is given, but the purpose is straightforward enough that context is implied.

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