list_users

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only says 'gets list of all users' with no disclosure of behavior such as pagination, permissions, rate limits, or whether it returns active/inactive users. The minimal description does not add behavioral context beyond the obvious.

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 one short sentence, approximately 5 words. It is maximally concise and contains no unnecessary information. Every word earns its place.

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's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. However, it could be more complete by noting, for example, that it returns all users without pagination or that it includes certain default fields. As it stands, it is functional but leaves room for ambiguity.

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 tool has no parameters and the schema coverage is 100% (no params to describe). According to guidelines, high schema coverage yields a baseline of 3 even without parameter info in the description. The description does not add parameter semantics because none exist.

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 explicitly states 'Henter liste over alle brugere i systemet' (Gets a list of all users in the system). It clearly identifies the verb (hente) and resource (brugere), and distinguishes from sibling tools like list_departments or list_orders which deal with different resources.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any prerequisites, filters, or context-specific use cases. With no parameters, the usage is straightforward, but there is no explicit direction.

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