bb_list_workspace_members

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

No annotations provided, but the description fully compensates by explaining why the live API is not used (403 due to scope), the directory as source of truth, and how to seed members.

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?

Well-structured with a clear purpose sentence, explanatory paragraphs, and parameter details. Compact but not terse; could be slightly more concise but effective.

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 two-parameter tool with no enums and an output schema, the description covers purpose, internals, usage guidance, and parameter semantics comprehensively.

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%, and the description adds useful context like case-insensitivity and nickname matching for query, and default workspace behavior, going slightly beyond 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 known workspace members to resolve a person's name to their UUID, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools that focus on pull requests.

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 when to use (inspect known members, handle ambiguity) and when not to (usually not needed before bb_add_pull_request_reviewers), and provides guidance on ambiguous matches.

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