list_users

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions optional role filter and pagination parameters, and contrasts with `search` for efficiency. However, it does not specify default pagination values or rate limits, which would enhance transparency.

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 serving a clear purpose: define the tool, provide an alternative, and specify appropriate use. Front-loaded with key information. No redundant or unnecessary words.

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 tool has 3 parameters (all described in schema), no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the essential aspects: what it does, when to use, and when not to. It lacks details on default pagination or return format, but for a list operation, it is mostly complete.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the role filter values and the context of using `list_users` for full directory versus `search` for specific lookups. This usage guidance enriches the parameter semantics.

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 'List Zendesk users with optional role filter', specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool `search` by noting that `search` is for finding specific users. This provides clarity on the tool's scope.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool: 'appropriate when you need the full directory feed (e.g. building a snapshot)'. It also tells when not to use it: 'For finding a user by email/name/organization/external_id, use search'. This provides clear guidance.

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