List Users

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive. The description adds a valuable behavioral trait: 'Secrets are never surfaced', informing data privacy. Does not address pagination behavior or rate limits, but the security note is a meaningful addition beyond annotations.

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?

Two concise sentences with front-loaded purpose and a critical security caveat. No redundant or filler content.

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 simple list tool with an output schema, the description covers core purpose and a security detail but omits pagination behavior and optional output format. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 has 0% description coverage for 3 parameters (page, limit, output_format). The description does not explain their purpose or relationship, despite the parameters being straightforward. For 0% coverage, the description should compensate, but it adds no param-level meaning.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'list' and resource 'users', specifies fields returned (name, email, RBAC roles), and adds a security distinction about secrets. Differentiates from sibling tools like get_user or list_account_rbac_roles.

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?

Implies use for listing all organization users but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like get_user for a single user or other list tools. Lacks 'when not to use' or context selection help.

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