List users

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context: pagination defaults (25), maximum page size (100), server-side search matching on username/note, and the recommendation to search instead of paging. This goes beyond what annotations alone communicate.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: the operation and filters, pagination behavior and search preference, and the sibling alternative. The most important distinguishing information is front-loaded.

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 output schema exists, the description does not need to explain return values. It covers the essential usage context: filters, pagination limits, efficient search usage, and when to choose marzban_users_get. No critical calling information is missing.

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 only 50%, with offset and status lacking meaningful documentation. The description partially compensates by mentioning the status filter and search behavior, and it repeats the limit default/maximum, but it does not clarify offset semantics or enumerate the status values.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Lists users') and immediately clarifies the filtering dimensions (status, search term). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling marzban_users_get by noting that the get tool should be used for a single known username.

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?

It gives explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus marzban_users_get, and it advises preferring 'search' over paging through all users. This is concrete, actionable routing information beyond the raw schema.

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