learningsuite_list_members

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It only says 'Get all members with optional filtering and pagination' and does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the operation is read-only, default behaviors for filters, or whether groups are included by default. This is minimal disclosure for a list operation.

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, focused sentence: 'Get all members with optional filtering and pagination'. It contains no redundant information, front-loads the core purpose, and is easily scannable. Perfect conciseness for a minimal tool description.

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?

The tool is a straightforward list operation with five well-documented parameters and no output schema. The description is adequate for the basic purpose but lacks context about return values, pagination behavior, or how it relates to sibling tools. Given the moderate complexity, more guidance would improve completeness, but the schema covers the parameter semantics.

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%, with each parameter (limit, offset, includeGroups, days_not_logged_in_gte, include_never_logged_in) having a descriptive comment. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so 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 all members with optional filtering and pagination' clearly states the action (get), the resource (all members), and the optional scoping (filtering and pagination). It distinguishes from sibling tools like learningsuite_list_team_members by specifying 'all members', and from get_member by implying a list operation. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from all sibling list tools, so it doesn't achieve a perfect 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as learningsuite_list_team_members or learningsuite_get_member. The description provides no context for selection, no exclusions, and no mentions of preferred use cases like large member lists or needing group inclusion.

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