session_login_as_users

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Search' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not disclose search semantics, what 'available' means, whether an active login-as session is required, or any pagination/result behavior. This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation safety signals.

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 compact, front-loaded with the main purpose, and contains no filler. The Args block is clearly structured. Overall it is appropriately brief, though a few of the lines are near-tautological.

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?

The tool is simple: two optional parameters, no enums, and an output schema exists to describe return values. The description gives the core purpose but lacks context about when to invoke it relative to siblings like session_login_as and users_search, and it does not clarify the intended workflow.

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 0%, so the description needed to compensate. It only adds 'q: Query' and 'limit: Max rows,' which provide minimal meaning beyond the schema and do not clarify what q searches against, matching rules, or how limit behaves. The description adds little value for the two 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 states a clear verb-resource pair: 'Search users available for login-as.' This distinguishes it from generic users_search and from the action-oriented session_login_as sibling. However, it does not explicitly describe its role as a helper step before session_login_as.

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 phrase 'available for login-as' implies the tool is used when an agent needs to find candidate users to impersonate, which gives useful context. But it never explicitly says when to prefer this over users_search or other user-list alternatives, and it provides no exclusions.

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