get_user_ids

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the operation is 'Get all' but does not explicitly disclose read-only nature, authentication requirements, pagination behavior, or any side effects. The endpoint reference adds little behavioral context.

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 very concise, with the primary purpose front-loaded in the first sentence. The second sentence about the endpoint is of marginal value and could be considered slightly unnecessary, but it does not significantly detract from the overall conciseness.

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 tool with no parameters and an output schema, the description is minimally viable. It states what it does, but it lacks context on when to use it relative to sibling tools and does not provide any behavioral details beyond the basic get operation. Given the simplicity of the tool, the description is adequate but leaves room for improvement.

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, so the description is not required to explain parameter semantics. Schema coverage is effectively 100% due to the empty parameter set, and the description adds no unnecessary parameter details.

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: 'Get all organization user IDs.' It uses a specific verb+resource combination and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_users by focusing specifically on IDs rather than full user objects.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_users or get_user_by_email. It does not mention scenarios where ID-only retrieval is preferred, nor does it exclude other tools.

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