infomaniak_list_kchat_channel_members

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds the behavioral nuance that passing user_id returns a specific member snapshot, which is beyond what annotations provide. However, it does not discuss pagination or empty results, though the output schema likely covers return format.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then adds the optional behavior. No filler or redundant information, every word earns 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?

The tool is simple, and the annotations plus output schema provide substantial context. The description explains the core operation and the optional parameter behavior, which is sufficient for a basic list command. However, it could be more complete by explicitly noting the read-only nature or contrasting with the manage-members sibling, though these are inferable.

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 already describes both parameters completely (channel_id and user_id) with 100% coverage. The description only paraphrases the optional user_id behavior ('optionally including one specific member snapshot') and adds no new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies because schema coverage is high.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' and clearly identifies the resource as 'members of a kChat channel', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'manage_kchat_channel_members' (which modifies) and 'list_kchat_channels' (which lists channels). The optional member snapshot feature adds further specificity.

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 by stating the action, but it does not explicitly say when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusions. There is no mention of 'for read-only member listing' or 'use manage_kchat_channel_members to modify members', which would be helpful given the many kChat sibling tools.

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