list_memberships

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions pagination but fails to mention authorization requirements, scope (only accessible memberships), or any side effects. The tool appears to be a read operation, but no explicit confirmation.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences, no filler. Each word serves a purpose. The structure is front-loaded with the primary action.

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 tool with five parameters and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It omits details about pagination defaults, response structure, and filtering behavior. Sibling tools like list_team_members might have richer descriptions, making this one feel incomplete.

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 60%. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema for parameters like status, role, page, per_page. It fails to explain the filtering effect of status and role enums, which could be critical for correct usage.

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?

Description clearly states the action 'list' and resource 'members of a workspace', with mention of pagination. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like add_team_member, remove_membership, update_membership by focusing on listing.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_team_members or list_workspaces. The description lacks context about prerequisites or filtering scenarios.

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