get_all_users_api_v1_users_all_get

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

The description does not disclose any behavioral traits (e.g., pagination, authentication requirements, rate limits). Without annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it provides no details beyond the bare function.

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 (three words). While it is front-loaded and to the point, it may be too brief to be helpful, leaning toward under-specification rather than conciseness.

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 complexity of sibling tools and the existence of an output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to clarify the scope of 'all users' (e.g., system-wide or per session) or any response structure hints that the schema could provide.

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?

There are no parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. The description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema by implying no filters are available. A baseline of 4 is reduced because the description does not enrich the understanding of the tool's operation.

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 'Get All Users' clearly indicates the tool retrieves all user records. It uses a specific verb and resource, and the name includes 'all' for emphasis. However, it does not distinguish from the sibling tool 'get_users_api_v1_users', which likely has the same purpose.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus other user retrieval tools like 'get_user_by_id' or 'search_users'. The description lacks context for selection among siblings.

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