tag_member

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: case-insensitive tags, auto-create on add, silent ignore on remove, idempotence, auth requirements (API key read scope), rate limits (max 10 concurrent), read-only/dry-run modes, and 404 if member not found.

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 well-structured with a brief summary, usage guidance, and an args list. It is slightly longer than necessary but avoids redundancy and front-loads key information.

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 complexity (4 parameters, many sibling tools) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers all aspects: purpose, usage, parameter meanings, return format, and limitations. No gaps remain.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description compensates by explaining each parameter in detail (e.g., list_id format and source, email_address must exist, tags_to_add/remove as comma-separated strings).

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 it adds/removes tags from a single member and explicitly says it does not modify profile data or subscription status. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like add_member, add_members_to_segment, and update_member.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., tag_member for per-member tag changes, add_members_to_segment for bulk, update_member for profile changes). It also covers idempotent behavior and prerequisites.

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