clio_list_users

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, destructive, or any side effects. Essential behavioral traits for a list operation (e.g., return format, pagination) are omitted.

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 short but prioritizes routing details over core purpose. It lacks essential information about tool functionality, making it insufficient rather than concise.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description fails to provide a clear purpose or parameter semantics. For a low-complexity tool, the description is critically incomplete and does not enable correct tool selection or invocation.

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 single parameter 'arguments' is described as a JSON string of arguments, which adds minimal insight. Given 0% schema coverage, the description should detail expected fields (e.g., filters, pagination) but does not, leaving the agent underinformed.

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 merely repeats the tool name 'list_users' without specifying what it does, such as retrieving a list of users from Clio. It does not differentiate from sibling list tools like clio_list_activities or clio_list_bills.

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?

Provides routing and authentication context (JWT, tenant, company scope) but offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like clio_get_user or other list tools.

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