list_location_members

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states it's a list operation, but omits details such as required permissions, pagination, rate limits, or return format. The 'optionally check one user' behavior is ambiguous (e.g., returns true/false or filters the list). The description lacks essential behavioral traits.

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 very short (one sentence) with no redundant words. It efficiently conveys the core action. However, it may be too brief for adequate understanding, but conciseness itself is high.

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 two parameters and no output schema, the description provides the basic purpose and optional filtering. However, it lacks details on output structure, pagination, permissions, and the exact effect of the optional user_id. It is minimally adequate but not complete.

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 0% (no parameter descriptions in schema). The description adds minimal meaning: 'optionally check one user' vaguely hints at the user_id parameter's purpose but does not clarify whether it filters results or returns a boolean. The location_id parameter is not explained at all. For a tool with zero schema coverage, the description must compensate but fails to provide clear parameter 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'list' and the resource 'members of a location', and distinguishes from sibling tools like list_group_members or list_company_members by specifying the location scope. The parenthetical 'optionally check one user' adds nuance, clarifying an optional filtering use case.

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 implies use for listing location members or checking a specific user's membership, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. similar list member tools (e.g., list_company_members, list_group_members) or when not to use it (e.g., if only aggregate counts are needed). No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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