get-member

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

Annotations already declare this as read-only, idempotent, and open-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by listing returned fields and indicating valid ID sources, though it does not discuss permissions or failure 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 front-loaded with the core purpose, then usage guidance, an example, and return fields. Every section is useful and compact, with no redundant restatement.

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 one-parameter read tool with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the description supplies the missing pieces: where the ID comes from and what fields are returned. An agent has enough information to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaningful semantics by explaining that memberId is an organizationMemberId obtained from assignees, comment creators, attendees, or get-member-list. This helps the agent supply the correct identifier rather than just any string.

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?

Clearly states a specific verb and resource: getting details of a Dooray organization member. It distinguishes itself indirectly from get-member-list by requiring an existing member ID, but does not explicitly clarify when to use it instead of the sibling get-my-member-info.

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?

Gives concrete guidance for where to obtain the required memberId, including task assignees, comment creators, calendar attendees, and get-member-list results. It lacks an explicit when-not condition or direct comparison with get-my-member-info, so it is strong but not complete.

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