subMemberListQuery

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true; the description adds the important auth constraint ('Master UID API key only') and the exact data scope (all sub UIDs plus the universal-transfer subset). No contradiction with annotations exists, and the added behavioral context is meaningful despite being compact.

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?

Three short sentences with no filler: purpose, return content, and auth restriction. Every sentence contributes information an agent needs, and the most important scope information is front-loaded.

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 zero-parameter read-only query, the description fully covers what the tool does, what it returns, and who is allowed to call it. The lack of an output schema is mitigated by explicitly naming the two result categories, leaving no obvious gap for correct invocation.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema already covers everything with an empty properties object. Since there are no parameters to document, the baseline of 4 applies; the description does not need to add parameter-level detail.

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?

States a specific verb ('Query'), a specific resource ('sub UIDs under the current master UID'), and the exact result categories ('all sub UIDs' and those with 'universal transfer permission'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like querySubMembers or queryEscrowSubMembersV5 without needing to inspect their schemas.

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 provides clear context: this is a master-UID-only API key operation and a read-only sub-UID listing. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or state when not to use this tool, but the scoping restriction is enough to guide correct usage.

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