List Users With Access To A Generic Tool

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

Beyond annotations (readOnly, idempotent), the description adds pagination details (page, per_page) and the API endpoint. However, the contradictory statement about returning Custom - Configurable Tools undermines trust. Some useful behavioral info is present but marred by inconsistency.

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 a single paragraph with multiple pieces of information, but it includes an erroneous sentence about returning Custom - Configurable Tools, which adds noise. It could be more concise and focused without the misleading statement.

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?

The description lacks a clear description of the return structure (user fields, pagination metadata format). The contradictory return type statement makes it incomplete. No output schema is provided, so the description should cover this, but it fails to do so adequately.

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 mentions required parameters and pagination controls, but these are already evident from the schema. It adds no new meaning beyond what the schema provides (e.g., filter example not elaborated).

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 it returns a list of users for a given project and generic tool, which is clear. However, it later contradicts itself by saying it returns a paginated array of Custom - Configurable Tools, causing confusion. The verb and resource are specific, but the inconsistency lowers clarity from a 5.

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 usage context (enumerate tools for paginated overview, find IDs, filter by query parameters) but does not explicitly exclude alternative tools like list_users_with_access_to_a_generic_tool_item. No when-not-to-use or direct comparison with siblings, leaving some ambiguity.

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