Fetch all users

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so "Read-only" in the description is pure repetition of structured data. The only genuinely added detail is the HTTP path, and nothing is said about pagination behavior, the fact that per_page is not honored by every endpoint, or how filters interact – context an agent calling this tool would actually need.

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?

Three short fragments, front-loaded with the action and resource. Tighter than most, though the trailing "Read-only" earns nothing given the annotations and could be dropped.

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?

Eight optional parameters, no output schema, and rich annotations mean the safety profile is covered, but the description leaves out pagination expectations and the fact that results can be narrowed by filters – an agent reading only the description would not know this is a paginated, filterable list. Adequate as a minimum-viable definition, not complete.

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% for all eight parameters, including page/per_page semantics and the note that per_page is not honored everywhere, so the schema carries parameter meaning. The description adds nothing about the filter_* parameters or the markdown-vs-json default, which is acceptable at baseline 3.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Fetch all users") and adds the underlying endpoint (GET /users), which lets an agent distinguish it from placetel_get_user, placetel_create_user, and placetel_list_sip_users. The only weakness is that "all users" reads as unfiltered even though the schema exposes six filter parameters.

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?

There is no guidance on when to choose this over placetel_get_user (single user) or placetel_list_sip_users (a similarly-named sibling that could easily be confused with it). A "list all users in the account" framing is implied by the verb, but nothing states prerequisites, when filtering is preferable, or when not to use it.

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