get_project_team

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It implies a read operation ('List') but does not disclose authentication needs, rate limits, or whether the result includes all staff or paginated. For a simple listing tool, this is adequate but could state if there are any side effects or limitations.

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 immediately conveys the purpose and output. It is front-loaded and contains no extraneous words, earning its place.

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 the low complexity (1 parameter, no output schema, no nested objects), the description covers the essential purpose and returned data. It could be more complete by noting if only current staff are included or if historical data is returned, but it is largely sufficient for a basic list tool.

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%, and the input schema already provides a detailed description for 'project_name' including partial matching and first-match behavior. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond confirming the return includes booking counts, which is return info, not param semantics. 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 'staff members who worked on a project', and specifies what information is returned (number of bookings). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_staff_projects' which lists projects for a staff member, not staff for a project.

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 when to use 'get_staff_projects' or 'get_project_tasks'. No explicit context or exclusions are given.

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