appcrane_list_app_members

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It covers the return format and required permissions. It implies a read operation but does not explicitly state it is read-only, which would be a minor improvement.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and output, then usage guidance and permissions. No fluff, every sentence adds value.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, output fields, usage context, and permissions. It is complete.

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 only parameter 'slug' has no schema description, and the description does not elaborate on its format or source. However, the context makes it clear it identifies the app, so it is adequate but not fully compensatory for the 0% schema coverage.

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 tool lists users with their roles, specifying the verb 'list', the resource 'app members', and the output details (email, name, role). It also distinguishes from sibling tools like grant and revoke by recommending use before those operations.

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?

Explicitly advises 'Use this before granting or revoking to see who is already in.' Also states required permissions: 'App-admin or owner of the app required (or global admin / platform_admin).'

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