plane-member-list

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'list', implying a read operation, but fails to mention pagination, output format, authentication, or any side effects. The lack of an output schema exacerbates the gap, as the agent cannot infer what data is returned.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It directly conveys the tool's core function without elaboration, earning 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 one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose but leaves out important details like return format, pagination, and required privileges. It is minimally viable but not fully informative.

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% (the single parameter has a description). The baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning to the parameter; it does not mention project_id or its role. Thus, the description does not improve parameter understanding 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 'List all members of a project' clearly states the action (list) and the resource (members scoped to a project). It distinguishes the tool from sibling tools like plane-workspace-member-list (workspace-level) and plane-project-member-add/remove (mutations), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as plane-workspace-member-list or other list tools. The description does not mention project context or prerequisites beyond what the schema implies. There is no explicit direction for the agent.

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