kaiten_list_users

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds that this is a lookup that yields IDs, but says nothing about pagination behavior or how many users come back by default, which matters given the limit/offset parameters.

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?

A single tight sentence with the purpose front-loaded and no filler. It is appropriately sized for a simple lookup tool, though the trailing rationale could be trimmed without losing meaning.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, and annotations cover safety. However, for a paginated lookup the description omits paging guidance and does not clarify that query is optional (0 required parameters), leaving a real gap for correct invocation.

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 0% across three parameters, so the description must carry the load. It only hints at 'query'; the limit (default 25, max 100) and offset pagination parameters are entirely undocumented in both schema and description, and the description implies query is the mechanism even though it is optional.

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 pairs a specific verb ('Find') with a specific resource ('company users') and states the downstream purpose (obtaining user IDs for ownership/membership). It is distinguishable from kaiten_get_current_user, though it never names that sibling or the other list_* lookups it could be confused with.

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?

'Find company users by query to obtain user IDs for ownership and membership' implies the context of use (you need an ID to assign ownership or add a member) but gives no explicit when-to-use versus when-not, and no alternative such as kaiten_get_current_user or kaiten_list_card_members.

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