List Users

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses the auth requirement (admin API key), pagination behavior (~100 users per page), and response structure (JSON with users array and pagination meta). It does not cover potential errors or rate limits, but the provided details are meaningful.

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 concise, front-loaded with the purpose, and each sentence provides useful information: admin API requirement, fixed page size, and response format. No waste.

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 list tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavioral aspects (pagination, response format, auth). It does not explain retry behavior or error handling, but these are not critical for a simple list endpoint.

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 schema descriptions cover all 5 parameters (100% coverage) with definitions, defaults, and enums, so the description adds no parameter-specific meaning. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 the specific action 'List users' and the resource via 'admin API', clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like discourse_get_user (which retrieves a single user) and discourse_list_user_posts (which lists a user's posts). It also mentions the response format, reinforcing 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 provides clear context by stating 'Requires admin API key', implying it is for admin-level user listing. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the admin requirement and the plural 'users' offer reasonable guidance.

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