github_users_list

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

With no annotations and a bare description, the tool discloses no behavioral traits. Critical information about side effects (none expected for a list), authentication requirements, rate limits, or response format is entirely absent.

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 extremely concise (two words), but it sacrifices informative value for brevity. While not verbose, it fails to earn its place by adding context beyond the tool name.

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 has no output schema and moderate complexity (pagination parameters), the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., a paginated list of users with IDs and details). Instead, it provides no context, leaving the agent to infer behavior from the input schema alone.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides for the 'since' and 'per_page' parameters.

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 'List users' clearly states the verb and resource, but it is overly generic and fails to distinguish from numerous sibling user-list tools (e.g., github_users_list_followers_for_user, github_users_list_gpg_keys_for_user). It does not specify which users (e.g., all users, authenticated user's followers) or the scope.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites, pagination behavior, or any criteria for choosing this over other user list tools.

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