get_space_memberFetch a space member's community profile by email and space ID. Reads Circle data to display membership information.
Show Space Member. Reads community data.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | |||
| account | No | Named private Circle account; selects credentials, not a remote community ID. | |
| space_id | Yes | Space ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds only 'Reads community data,' which repeats the read-only nature without revealing anything new—no auth requirements, rate limits, return shape, or edge cases.
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?
Two fragments; the second sentence ('Reads community data') is redundant with the title and annotations and does not earn its place. The brevity reflects under-specification rather than efficient communication.
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 lookup, annotations and schema cover safety and inputs, but the description leaves sibling disambiguation, prerequisites, and return-value expectations unstated. With no output schema, some indication of what is returned would help the agent call it correctly.
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%, with the account parameter even explaining its credential-selection role. The description adds no parameter meaning, so baseline 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 merely restates the title ('Show Space Member') and adds the vague phrase 'Reads community data,' which does not name a specific verb beyond the title or distinguish it from sibling getters like get_member or get_space_group_member. It is a tautological description.
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 on when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as list_space_members, get_member, or get_space_group_member. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or context signals to route the agent.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.