list_users

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions the visibility filter and implicitly requires authentication. However, it omits disclosure of read-only nature, potential rate limits, pagination, or other behavioral traits that an agent should know.

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 with no wasted words. The Args section is well-structured and front-loaded. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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 simple list tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the basic purpose and parameter. However, it lacks details on pagination, sorting, or error conditions, leaving some gaps for a complete understanding.

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 only provides type and default, with 0% description coverage. The description adds examples (AllUsers, ActiveUsers) but does not list all possible values or explain the default behavior. It adds some value but is not comprehensive.

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 lists users visible to the authenticated principal. It is distinct from sibling tools like list_records, which list records of a specified module, and further distinguishes by specifying the visibility filter.

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 details for the 'type' parameter but offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., list_records or search_records). No explicit context or prerequisites are mentioned.

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