Get Room Member IDs

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

No annotations are present, so the description bears full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It states a requirement (bot membership) but does not mention side effects, error handling, pagination, or what happens if the bot is not a member. This is a significant gap for a read operation.

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 short sentences with no redundancy. The purpose and a key requirement are conveyed efficiently, making it easy to parse.

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?

The tool is simple and the description implies the output (user IDs). However, it does not specify the shape of the output (e.g., list) or potential edge cases. Given the lack of output schema, it is sufficiently complete, but could be slightly more explicit.

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?

The schema fully documents the parameter (roomId with format hint). The description adds minimal extra context by referencing the room and membership, but does not elaborate on the parameter beyond the schema. Baseline 3 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 clearly states the action (get user IDs), the resource (all members in a LINE multi-person chat room), and distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_group_member_ids by specifying 'multi-person chat room' and 'bot must be a member of the room'.

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 a clear prerequisite: the bot must be a member of the room. While it doesn't explicitly compare with alternatives, the context makes it obvious that this is the tool for retrieving member IDs in a room, not a group or other context.

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