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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the underlying endpoint (GET /users) and clarifies filter semantics, but says nothing about pagination limits, rate limits, or result shape beyond what schema fields already state.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action before filters, sorting, and endpoint. Little waste, though the trailing 'GET /users' is of marginal value to an agent selecting the tool.

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 read-only list tool with a fully documented schema and annotations covering safety, the description covers filtering, searching, and sorting adequately. It lacks any note on pagination behavior at the description level, but the schema's offset field carries that hint.

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%, so all eight parameters are already documented, including the sort enum and offset paging hint. The description restates filters (group/place/email/free text) and the 'last unlock' sort without adding syntax or format detail beyond the schema, 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List users (members) of the organization') and describes the filterable dimensions. It implicitly contrasts with the singular kisi_get_user sibling, but never names it explicitly, so sibling differentiation is left to inference.

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 conveys implied usage through its filter/sort enumeration, so an agent can guess how to narrow results. It gives no explicit when-to-use guidance or conditions for choosing this over kisi_get_user or other list tools, and no exclusions.

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