redmine_users

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It only lists actions but does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether delete is soft or hard, if create triggers notifications), security requirements, or any notable behavior beyond the action names.

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 concise sentence with no fluff. However, it lacks structure for easy scanning and could benefit from a brief breakdown of each action or parameter grouping.

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 has 8 parameters, nested objects, and pagination (limit, max_pages), yet the description does not mention return values, pagination behavior, error handling, or how actions relate to parameters. With no output schema, the description leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand the tool's full behavior.

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 at 50%, meaning half the parameters already have descriptions in the schema. The tool description adds no parameter-specific information, failing to compensate for the uncovered parameters or provide additional context beyond the schema.

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 states the resource (users) and lists five actions (list, get, create, update, delete), providing a clear purpose. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like redmine_issues or redmine_projects, as the tool name itself already indicates the resource.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no conditions for each action. It simply lists actions without context on appropriate scenarios or exclusions.

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