ftp_user_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. The verb 'List' communicates a non-destructive read operation, which is helpful. However, the description does not disclose whether all FTP users are returned, whether pagination or filtering exists, or what the response structure looks like.

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 filler or redundant wording. It states the operation and the resource in a front-loaded, efficient manner that is appropriately sized for a zero-parameter list tool.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity, empty parameter schema, and no output schema, the description is largely sufficient. It clearly identifies a simple read operation. The only minor gap is that it does not elaborate on the return payload or filtering semantics, but these are not necessary for basic 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?

The tool has zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100%, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description inherits the baseline of 4 for a no-parameter tool; it does not need to add parameter semantics.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a clear resource ('FTP users'), stating exactly what the tool does. It distinguishes the tool from its sibling FTP tools, which are all mutation operations (ftp_user_add, ftp_user_update, ftp_user_delete), and there is no competing FTP listing tool.

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 usage is implied: an agent would call this to retrieve FTP users rather than to modify them. However, the description does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives or mention any exclusions or prerequisites, so guidance is minimal.

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