learningsuite_get_member

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only says 'Get a member by ID.' It does not disclose what the response contains, whether includeGroups changes the output, or any limitations. The read-only nature is implied but not explicitly stated, leaving the agent without sufficient behavioral context.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the verb and key scoping information. It contains no redundant words and is appropriately sized for a simple read operation.

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?

While the tool is simple and the description is clear, there is no output schema and the description does not mention return values or the effect of the includeGroups parameter. This leaves moderate gaps for a tool that could benefit from a brief note on response content or usage context, but the minimal description is still somewhat adequate.

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 provides descriptions for both parameters with 100% coverage, so the description does not need to add parameter details. Since the description adds no extra semantics beyond what the schema already provides, the baseline score of 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 'Get a member by ID' clearly states the action (get), resource (member), and the identifier used (ID). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_member_by_email and list_team_members, which use different lookup methods or scopes.

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 implies usage when a member ID is available, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_member_by_email. There are no exclusions or alternative tool mentions, so the usage context is only implied.

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