taiga_memberships_list

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 discloses only the core listing behavior and filter options, without mentioning pagination, default scope (all memberships vs. scoped), authentication requirements, or response format. This adds little beyond what the name and schema already convey.

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 short sentences, directly to the point, with no verbosity. 'List memberships' states the action, and 'Filter by project or role' adds useful filter capability. 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?

For a simple list tool with two optional filters, the description is minimally adequate, but it omits default behavior when no filters are given and any return-value or pagination details. Since there is no output schema, the description should compensate more for these missing behavioral cues.

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 coverage is 100%, with both parameters already described as 'Role ID' and 'Project ID'. The description only restates that filtering by project or role is possible, adding no new semantics about how the filters interact (e.g., AND/OR) or value formats. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema handles parameter documentation.

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 action ('List') and the resource ('memberships'), and mentions filtering capabilities. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like taiga_memberships_get, create, update, and delete, which have different actions.

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 the tool is used to list memberships with optional filters by project or role, but it does not explicitly contrast it with similar endpoints such as taiga_memberships_get for retrieving a single membership, nor does it mention when not to use this tool. Usage guidance is embedded in the action name but not elaborated.

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