get_member_tagRetrieve details for a specific member tag by ID to inspect its community data and verify tag information.
Shows a member tag's details. Reads community data.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tag_id | Yes | Member tag ID | |
| account | No | Named private Circle account; selects credentials, not a remote community ID. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description's 'Reads community data' largely restates the read-only nature without adding new behavioral context such as permissions required, error behavior, or rate limits.
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 short and front-loaded with the core action. The second sentence, 'Reads community data,' is somewhat redundant but does not bloat the definition.
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 read-by-ID tool with full schema coverage and rich annotations, the description is minimally adequate. However, it omits usage guidance and sibling differentiation, which leaves an agent with some ambiguity in tool selection.
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%, and both parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.
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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Shows a member tag's details.' It is easy to distinguish from siblings like create_member_tag, update_member_tag, and delete_member_tag, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from list_member_tags or get_tagged_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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_member_tags or get_tagged_member. It also lacks any exclusions or prerequisite context, leaving the agent to infer usage entirely from the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.