list_database_users

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It explains the output structure ('What you'll get') and access types, giving good insight into behavior. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or mention side effects of the optional output_file parameter, so it falls short of perfect transparency.

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 well-structured with clear headings, bullet points, and examples. It front-loads the primary purpose and provides necessary details in an organized manner without unnecessary verbosity. Every section (usage, output, required param, examples, access types) contributes value.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description compensates by detailing the expected return values (user IDs, status, permissions, etc.). It also includes example queries and a CLI reference, making it comprehensive for a list operation. The optional output_file is covered by the input schema, so the description remains complete enough.

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 coverage is 100%, and the description repeats the space_id parameter with uppercase examples, adding minimal value beyond the schema. The output_file parameter is not mentioned in the description at all, so the description does not significantly enhance parameter understanding beyond what the schema already provides.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'List all database users in a specific SAP Datasphere space.' It uses a specific verb (list) with a resource (database users) and scope (space), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create/update/delete_database_user.

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 'Use this tool when' section explicitly lists scenarios such as auditing user access and checking who has database access to a space. It also advises using it before creating a new user to avoid duplicates, providing clear context for when to use this tool over alternatives.

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