get_chat_channel_members

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

The description discloses that the tool is paginated via cursor/limit, which is key behavioral info. No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden and adequately conveys the read-only nature and pagination behavior.

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 concise: two sentences with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the core action and includes essential details efficiently.

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 tool's simplicity and no output schema, the description provides necessary information: what it returns (user IDs and names) and pagination. It could mention potential errors but is sufficient for selection and use.

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 covers all 4 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds context that cursor is the next_cursor from a previous call and that team_id falls back to an environment variable, enhancing the schema.

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 members of a Chat channel, including user IDs and names, and specifies it's for ClickUp Chat v3. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_chat_channel (which gets channel info) or list_chat_channels (lists channels).

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 explicitly says 'Use to see who is in a channel,' providing clear guidance. It does not mention when not to use or alternatives, but the purpose is narrow and well-defined.

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