list_org_members

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'List members' and offers no additional context about pagination, authentication, rate limits, or the visibility restrictions of certain filters (which are mentioned only in the schema). This is minimal transparency for a tool with optional filters and pagination.

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, informative sentence with a documentation link, achieving maximum clarity with minimal verbosity. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource.

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?

Given five parameters, two enums, and no output schema, the description is under-specified. It lacks behavioral details of the list operation, such as pagination behavior and the fact that certain filter results are only visible to org owners. A more complete description would mention these constraints.

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 descriptions cover 60% of parameters (org, role, filter), while page and per_page lack descriptions. The tool description adds no parameter-level detail beyond that; however, the schema's existing descriptions and parameter names are reasonably clear, so a baseline score is appropriate.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' and the resource 'members of a GitHub organization,' which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_team_members or list_org_repos. The docs link further reinforces the intended function.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. The description implies usage only through its clear purpose; it doesn't mention exclusions or related tools such as list_team_members for team-scoped queries.

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