get_member

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context about the return payload including profile, role, and security information, but does not mention possible error behavior, permissions, or other operational details. This is adequate but not rich.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that communicates the operation, target, and returned information without any filler. Every word contributes meaning.

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-only tool with a readOnlyHint annotation, the description is largely complete. It names the key output categories (profile, role, security info), which helps an agent understand what it will receive, though it does not describe error cases or explicitly contrast with list_members.

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 description coverage is 100%, so memberId is already fully documented in the schema. The description's mention of 'by ID' reinforces the parameter's purpose but adds no new format, constraint, or semantic detail beyond what the schema provides.

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 ('Get'), the resource ('specific Sub-Account member by ID'), and the expected output ('detailed profile, role, and security information'). It is easily distinguished from siblings like list_members, which are for listing rather than fetching a single member.

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 phrase 'by ID' makes the usage context clear: this tool is for fetching one specific member when an ID is known, as opposed to listing members. It does not explicitly name the alternative list_members or describe when not to use it, so it falls just short of a 5.

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