printix_list_users

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It does mention paging and optional filters, which are meaningful traits. It does not mention return shape, default page size, ordering, or authentication expectations, though these are less critical for a list-style read operation.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It efficiently communicates action, scope, optional filters, and pagination, and every phrase contributes useful information.

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 simple list tool, the description covers the essential context: what is listed, scope, filtering, and pagination. The absence of an output schema is not critical because 'List users' implies a collection of user objects, though slight gaps remain around response format and default paging behavior.

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 100%, so each parameter is already documented. The description adds the organizing idea that query and role are optional filters and that page/pageSize control paging, but it does not add per-parameter meaning beyond the schema. This matches the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('Printix users'), with clear tenant scope and optional filters/paging. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like printix_get_user (single user) and printix_list_groups (different resource).

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 intended use is inferable: use this when you need to enumerate or search users in the tenant. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives like printix_get_user or printix_search-type tools, nor does it mention exclusions or fallback guidance.

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