list_team_members

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

The description states roles are included, which is a behavioral trait. However, no annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose whether the tool is read-only (likely but unconfirmed), whether pagination is used, or what happens if the team_id is invalid.

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, clear sentence that is well-front-loaded with the key action. It wastes no words but could benefit from a brief note about team membership types or scope.

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 an output schema exists, the description need not explain return values. However, the tool is one of many team-related tools, and the description provides no context on how it differs from related membership tools like 'list_team_membership' or 'get_team_membership', leaving some ambiguity for the agent.

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 100% but the parameter description 'Team ID' is minimal. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides. For a single integer parameter, the schema alone is sufficient for correct invocation, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'all members of a team with their roles', which matches the tool name. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_team_bookings' or 'list_team_schedules', though the resource is distinct enough that confusion is unlikely.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_team_membership' (for a specific member) or 'list_team_invites'. It also does not mention prerequisites like requiring a valid team_id or the context of needing team admin permissions.

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