Get List Members

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

The description is a straightforward read operation and matches the annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false). However, it provides no additional behavioral context beyond what the annotations already convey, such as pagination behavior or response structure.

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, complete sentence with no redundant information. It is front-loaded with the action and target, and 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?

The tool is relatively simple with one required parameter and no output schema. The description conveys the core purpose and the annotations cover safety and idempotency. It could specify what a 'member' includes or the return format, but given the simple context, the description is nearly sufficient.

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 provides full descriptions for all three parameters, achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema already handles the semantics.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'members of a specific list', specifying the ID parameter. It is unambiguous and likely understood in context, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like x_get_list or x_get_list_posts.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only describes the basic operation without mentioning context or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer when this tool is appropriate relative to similar list-related tools.

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