ise_ers_list_guestuser

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. It discloses pagination ('Paginated.') and that it lists all, but does not describe the response format, what happens with large result sets beyond pagination defaults, ordering behavior, or whether read-only operations require special permissions.

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?

Two short sentences, zero waste. Front-loaded with the purpose statement. Efficient given the simplicity of the tool.

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?

With no output schema, no annotations, and only 33% parameter coverage, the description is thin. For a list tool with pagination defaults it works minimally, but an agent cannot know the return structure, how to page effectively, or whether there is a max size limit. The deployment param guidance is the strongest part, but it's buried in schema rather than description.

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 only 33% (deployment has a description; page and size do not). The description adds no parameter semantics beyond noting pagination exists. The page and size params have defaults but no semantic explanation of how they interact or what the max size is.

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 'List all Guest Users. Paginated.' clearly states the verb (list), resource (Guest Users), and scope (all), distinguishing it from sibling get/search variants like ise_ers_get_guestuser and ise_ers_search_guestuser. The purpose is clear and specific.

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 says 'Lists all' with no exclusion criteria, but provides no guidance on when to use this versus get/search variants, no mention of prerequisites, and no indication that it returns everything (which could be large). There is no alternative tool named or when-not guidance.

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