List members

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real operational context the annotations lack: a 100 req/10s rate limit and the fact that oversized page values are capped rather than rejected.

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 tight sentences with no filler; the rate-limit constraint and the pagination cap each earn their place. Leading with the rate limit before the purpose slightly delays the core statement, but it is still compact and scannable.

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 paginated list tool with full schema coverage and rich annotations, and no output schema to explain, the definition covers purpose, limits, and pagination adequately. It could note the relationship to get_member and membership tiers, but nothing blocks correct invocation.

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%, so all three parameters (page, size, account) are documented in the schema itself, including the 100 cap and the 'exact private shop profile label' clarification. The description merely restates the size cap, adding no meaning 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Lists all members for the current shop'), so an agent knows exactly what it returns. It does not distinguish itself from the nearby get_member sibling (single vs. list), so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Bulk-listing intent is implied by 'lists all members' and the paging parameters, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or pointer to get_member for a single lookup. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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