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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds useful behavioral detail (default ordering, page size, AND semantics for filters), but does not mention pagination limits, rate limits, or total-count behavior. With annotations handling safety, this is a moderate addition.

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?

Single dense sentence with the resource, default ordering, page size, filter facets, AND semantics, and the underlying endpoint. Front-loaded and zero waste.

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 filtered list tool with readOnly annotation and a fairly rich schema, the description covers scope, defaults, and filter logic. It lacks pagination guidance beyond default page size and does not indicate what the response items contain, but no output schema exists and the essentials are present.

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 78% and most parameters are self-described. The description adds value by stating that all filters are ANDed, which is not in the schema. It does not expand on the registration_after/before or include_suspended semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('List the school's users'), states the default scope (newest first, 20 per page), and enumerates filter dimensions. It distinguishes itself from siblings like learnworlds_get_user (single user) and learnworlds_list_user_courses (course-scoped).

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 usage by listing filterable facets, which tells the agent this tool is for filtered/sorted searches, but it does not explicitly state when to use this versus e.g. learnworlds_get_user or learnworlds_list_course_users. No exclusions or alternatives are named.

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