surveymonkey_list_contact_list_members

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the operation is a read-only listing, but does not mention response behavior, pagination semantics beyond parameter defaults, authentication needs, or any limitations. This is a minimal disclosure for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by a brief parameter list. Every line adds useful information without filler.

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 simple list tool with an output schema and fully documented parameters, the description is mostly complete. It covers what the tool does and the meaning of each argument. It falls short only in lacking explicit usage guidance and behavioral caveats, but the tool is low-complexity and low-risk.

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 0%, but the description compensates by defining all three parameters: list_id as the contact list ID, page as the page number, and per_page as results per page with defaults. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema types and titles.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Lists contacts that belong to a specific contact list.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like surveymonkey_list_contacts (all contacts) and surveymonkey_list_contact_lists (all lists), so an agent can tell it apart.

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 intended use is implied by the description: call this when you have a specific contact list ID and need its members. However, it does not explicitly compare against alternatives such as list_contacts or explain when not to use it, leaving some inference to the agent.

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