gp_current_users

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

The read-only annotation is reinforced by the [READ-ONLY] prefix, and the description adds the underlying CLI command and 'currently connected' temporal semantics. However, it does not disclose output format, pagination behavior, or any operational side effects beyond what the readOnly/destructive annotations already imply.

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 front-loaded sentence that communicates the read-only nature, the resource, and the optional user filter with no filler. Every part adds signal, and it is easy for an agent 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?

For a read-only query tool with four fully documented optional parameters and no output schema, the description is reasonably complete. The main gap is that sibling tools like get_globalprotect_users could overlap in purpose, and the description does not resolve that selection ambiguity or describe what the returned data looks like.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for all four optional parameters, so the schema carries the parameter-semantic burden. The description only adds a minor hint that the user parameter is optional for filtering by one user, which does not meaningfully extend the schema's documentation.

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 a specific action and resource: listing GlobalProtect users currently connected to a gateway firewall, with an optional single-user filter. It is clear and maps to a concrete CLI command, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the similarly named sibling get_globalprotect_users, leaving some ambiguity.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_globalprotect_users or get_active_sessions. The phrase 'optionally for one user' hints at a filtering use case, but there is no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative tool recommendation.

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