ecp_mssql_list_db_users

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'List' signals a read-only operation, but nothing is disclosed about whether default/admin users are included, what properties are returned, or what 'additional' specifically means. The description is minimal and not misleading, but it leaves behavioral details unspecified.

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: 'List additional MSSQL users on this account.' The verb and scope are front-loaded, and there is no superfluous content. Every word earns its place, though 'additional' could have been clarified.

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 zero-parameter listing tool, the description is mostly sufficient for invocation. However, there is no output schema and the description does not describe the return shape or clarify the 'additional' qualifier. The tool is simple enough that this is a minor gap, but it is not fully complete.

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 contains zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. Schema coverage is 100%, and the no-argument nature is already fully specified. Per the baseline for a zero-parameter tool, the description does not need to add parameter detail.

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 names the resource ('MSSQL users') and scope ('on this account'), making it distinct from database-level tools like ecp_mssql_list_databases. However, the qualifier 'additional' is unexplained and could confuse an agent about which users are included.

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?

No guidance is given about when to call this tool instead of alternative user-related tools such as ecp_mssql_list_privileges, ecp_mssql_create_database_user, or the MySQL/Postgres equivalents. The only implied trigger is needing a list of MSSQL users, but no explicit when/when-not context is provided.

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